Partnership. Barrick Gold Corporation ... · Barrick Gold Corporation . Annual Report 2015. Partnership. Performance. Value. Barrick Gold Corporation. Annual Report 2015. . Barrick

Barrick Gold Corporation Annual Report 2015

Partnership.Performance.Value.

Barrick G

old

Co

rpo

ration

Annual Report 2015

www.barrick.com

Barrick Gold Corporation

Head Office:Brookfield PlaceTD Canada Trust Tower161 Bay Street, Suite 3700P.O. Box 212Toronto, Canada M5J 2S1

Tel: 416 861-9911Toll-free throughout North America:1 800 720-7415Fax: 416 861-2492Email: [email protected]

@barrickgold

/barrick.gold.corporation

2015 was a watershed

year for Barrick in which we

delivered on our promises

and fulfilled our four strategic

priorities. We did what we

said we would do—we streamlined the business,

strengthened the balance sheet, generated free

cash flow, and further focused our portfolio

around our core mines in the Americas. In 2016,

we will continue to build on our achievements

as we focus our efforts on growing free cash

flow through further debt and cost reduction.”

1234

Our vision is the generation of wealth through responsible mining—wealth for our owners, our people, and the countries and communities with which we partner. We aim to be the leading mining company focused on gold, growing our cash flow per share by developing and operating high-quality assets through disciplined allocation of human and financial capital and operational excellence.

Our Vision Scorecard

Message from the Chairman 4 | Message from the President 8 | Board of Directors 14 | Corporate Governance and Committees of the Board 15 | Executive Officers and Advisory Boards 16 | Partners 17 | Management’s Discussion and Analysis 18 | Mineral Reserves and Resources 87 | Financial Statements 99 | Notes to Financial Statements 104 | Shareholder Information 171

“

Kelvin Dushnisky, President

Cautionary Statement on Forward-Looking Information

changes in our credit ratings; the impact of inflation; fluctuations in the currency markets; changes in U.S. dollar interest rates; risks arising from holding derivative instruments; changes in national and local government legislation, taxation, controls or regulations and/or changes in the administration of laws, policies and practices, expropriation or nationalization of property and political or economic developments in Canada, the United States and other jurisdictions in which the company does or may carry on business in the future; damage to the company’s reputation due to the actual or perceived occurrence of any number of events, including negative publicity with respect to the company’s handling of environmental matters or dealings with community groups, whether true or not; the possibility that future exploration results will not be consistent with the company’s expectations; risks that exploration data may be incomplete and considerable additional work may be required to complete further evaluation, including but not limited to drilling, engineering and socio-economic studies and investment; risk of loss due to acts of war, terrorism, sabotage and civil disturbances; litigation; contests over title to properties, particularly title to undeveloped properties, or over access to water, power and other required infrastructure; business opportunities that may be presented to, or pursued by, the company; our ability to successfully integrate acquisitions or complete divestitures; employee relations; increased costs and risks related to the potential impact of climate change; availability and increased costs associated with mining inputs and labor; and the organization of our previously held African gold operations and properties under a separate listed company. In addition, there are risks and hazards associated with the business of mineral exploration, development and mining, including environmental hazards, industrial accidents, unusual or unexpected formations, pressures, cave-ins, flooding and gold bullion, copper cathode or gold or copper concentrate losses (and the risk of inadequate insurance, or inability to obtain insurance, to cover these risks).

Many of these uncertainties and contingencies can affect our actual results and could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in any forward-looking statements made by, or on behalf of, us. Readers are cautioned that forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance. All of the forward-looking statements made in this Annual Report 2015 are qualified by these cautionary statements. Specific reference is made to the most recent Form 40-F/Annual Information Form on file with the SEC and Canadian provincial securities regulatory authorities for a more detailed discussion of some of the factors underlying forward-looking statements and the risks that may affect Barrick’s ability to achieve the expectations set forth in the forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report 2015.

The company disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by applicable law.

Certain information contained or incorporated by reference in this Annual Report 2015, including any information as to our strategy, projects, plans or future financial or operating performance, constitutes “forward-looking statements”. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, are forward-looking statements. The words “believe”, “expect”, “anticipate”, “contemplate”, “target”, “plan”, “objective” “aspiration”, “aim”, “intend”, “project”, “continue”, “budget”, “estimate”, “potential”, “may”, “will”, “can”, “could”, and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements. In particular, this Annual Report 2015 contains forward-looking statements including, without limitation, with respect to: (i) Barrick’s forward-looking production guidance; (ii) estimates of future all-in sustaining costs per ounce/pound, cash costs per ounce and C1 cash costs per pound; (iii) cash flow forecasts; (iv) projected capital, operating and exploration expenditures; (v) targeted debt and cost reductions; (vi) mine life and production rates; (vii) potential mineralization and metal or mineral recoveries; (viii) Barrick’s Best in Class program (including potential improvements to financial and operating performance and mine life that may result from certain Best in Class initiatives); (ix) expectations regarding future price assumptions, financial performance and other outlook or guidance; and (x) the estimated timing and conclusions of technical reports and other studies. Forward-looking statements are necessarily based upon a number of estimates and assumptions that, while considered reasonable by the company as at the date of this news release in light of management’s experience and perception of current conditions and expected developments, are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies. Known and unknown factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements and undue reliance should not be placed on such statements and information. Such factors include, but are not limited to: fluctuations in the spot and forward price of gold, copper or certain other commodities (such as silver, diesel fuel, natural gas and electricity); the speculative nature of mineral exploration and development; changes in mineral production performance, exploitation and exploration successes; risks associated with the fact that certain Best in Class initiatives are still in the early stages of evaluation and additional engineering and other analysis is required to fully assess their impact; diminishing quantities or grades of reserves; increased costs, delays, suspensions and technical challenges associated with the construction of capital projects; operating or technical difficulties in connection with mining or development activities, including disruptions in the maintenance or provision of required infrastructure and information technology systems; failure to comply with environmental and health and safety laws and regulations; timing of receipt of, or failure to comply with, necessary permits and approvals; uncertainty whether some or all of the Best in Class initiatives will meet the company’s capital allocation objectives; the impact of global liquidity and credit availability on the timing of cash flows and the values of assets and liabilities based on projected future cash flows; adverse O

ve B

ran

d l

Des

ign

/ M

ove

able

Inc.

/ M

erri

ll C

orp

ora

tio

n C

anad

a / L

oca

tio

n P

ho

tog

rap

hy

Pete

r C

hri

sto

ph

er /

Exec

uti

ve P

ho

tog

rap

hy

Mat

thew

Ple

xman

550–590

775–825

Actual

Revised reporting and communication lines to reflect new modelClosed Salt Lake City office

Reduced total debt by $3.1b

Generated $0.5b1, 2 of free cash flow at a realized price of $1,157

Sold 5 non-core assets and 50% of interest in 2 other non-core mines Formed 2 joint ventures

6.123

831

596

1Barrick Gold Corporation | Annual Report 2015

2015 2015 2016Target Progress

OP

ER

AT

ION

SS

AF

ET

Y

Target

Streamline the Business

Strengthen the Balance Sheet

Maximize Free Cash Flow

Focus on Best Assets & Regions

Production (Moz)

AISC1 ($/oz)

Cash Costs1 ($/oz)

Implement decentralized modelEliminate regional layers

Reduce total debt by $3b

Generate free cash flow at $1,100 gold

Focus on core mines in the Americas

6.2–6.6

860–895

600–640

Implement Best in Class initiative

Reduce total debt by at least $2b

Generate free cash flow at $1,000 gold

Assess remainingnon-core assets

5.0–5.5

3

0.5

Fatalities

Total Reportable

Injury Frequency Rate

1. Non-GAAP financial measure—see pages 76–85 of the 2015 Financial Report.2. Excludes $610m in proceeds related to the Pueblo Viejo streaming transaction.3. Met revised guidance of 6.0–6.15 million ounces adjusted for asset sales and a mechanical event at Pueblo Viejo.

0

0.6

0

0.4

ST

RA

TE

GIC

PR

IOR

ITIE

S

1. Mineral reserves are estimated in accordance with National Instrument 43-101 as required by Canadian securities regulatory authorities. Complete mineral reserve and mineral resource data for all mines and projects referenced in this Annual Report, including tonnes, grades and ounces, can be found on pages 87–94.

Barrick Gold Corporation | Annual Report 20152

Americas-focusedPortfolio

Americas Other

Lagunas NortePierina

HemloGolden Sunlight

Zaldívar

Veladero

Pueblo Viejo

GoldstrikeCortezTurquoise Ridge

NEVADA

Barrick has focused its operations on top-tier mines in the Americas that will provide a platform for disciplined growth in the future.

These assets are among the most attractive in the industry, and contributed 62% of production and 85% of adjusted EBITDA this year at an average AISC of $660 per ounce.

Our gold reserves are of equally superior quality. In 2015, we reported proven and probable reserves of 92 million ounces1—the industry’s largest—with an average reserve grade of 1.32 grams per tonne. The average reserve grade of our core mines is even higher at 1.88 grams per tonne.

Our portfolio also contains a number of the world’s largest undeveloped gold deposits, which offer substantial leverage to higher gold prices.

BARRICK AT-A-GLANCE

USA Goldstrike Cortez Turquoise Ridge JV Golden Sunlight

CANADA Hemlo

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC Pueblo Viejo JV

PERU Lagunas Norte Pierina (in closure)

CHILE Zaldívar JV (copper)

ARGENTINA Veladero

TANZANIA / ACACIA Acacia (64%)

ZAMBIA Lumwana (copper)

SAUDI ARABIA Jabal Sayid JV (copper, in commissioning)

PAPUA NEW GUINEA Porgera JV

AUSTRALIA Kalgoorlie JV

3Barrick Gold Corporation | Annual Report 2015

(In millions of US dollars, except per share data) 2015 2014 2013

(Based on IFRS)

Revenues $ 9,029 $ 10,239 $ 12,527 Net earnings (loss) (2,838) (2,907) (10,366) per share (2.44) (2.50) (10.14) Adjusted net earnings1 344 793 2,569 per share1 0.30 0.68 2.51 Operating cash flow 2,794 2,296 4,239 Free cash flow1 1,081 (136) (1,142) EBITDA (710) (295) (7,661) Adjusted EBITDA1 3,187 3,811 5,026 Cash and equivalents 2,455 2,699 2,424 Dividends paid per share 0.14 0.20 0.50Annualized dividend per share2 0.08 0.20 0.20

Gold production (000s oz) 6,117 6,249 7,166 Average realized gold price per ounce1 $ 1,157 $ 1,265 $ 1,407 Cash costs per ounce3 $ 596 $ 598 $ 566 All-in sustaining cash costs per ounce $ 831 $ 864 $ 915 Copper production (Mlbs) 511 436 539 Average realized copper price per pound1 $ 2.37 $ 3.03 $ 3.39 C1 cash costs per pound1 $ 1.73 $ 1.92 $ 1.92All-in sustaining costs per pound1 $ 2.33 $ 2.79 $ 2.74

1. Non-GAAP financial measure—see pages 76–85 of the 2015 Financial Report.2. Calculation based on annualizing the last dividend paid in the respective year.3. Unchanged from the measure previously referred to as adjusted operating costs.4. 100% basis.

Financial Highlights

1,053

2015 Production (000s oz)

Core Mines2015 AISC ($/oz) 2015 EBITDA ($M)4

999

Goldstrike

Cortez

Veladero

Pueblo Viejo

Lagunas Norte

Goldstrike

Cortez

Veladero

Pueblo Viejo

Lagunas Norte

Goldstrike

Cortez

Veladero

Pueblo Viejo

Lagunas Norte

602

572 60%

560

658

603

946

597

509

600

630

324

702

454

Businesses run as partnerships generate the greatest sustained returns because they tap the deepest forces driving the engine of capitalism. Those in business who claim that what matters foremost is the gain of owners often justify their view by pointing to Adam Smith’s theory of the “invisible hand”: individuals pursuing their own private interests will, without even intending to, also promote broader social interests by generating shared prosperity. Few seem to remember the wider context of Smith’s theory. Smith observed that people in commercial society are dramatically interdependent. Even the making of a laborer’s coat, he noted, takes the work of a great many people. Every individual needs the help of countless others—and the only way he or she can be assured of getting their help is by appealing to their interest. Market transactions therefore rest on a foundation not only of private self-interest, but also of what Smith called sympathy: our ability to see things from another’s perspective and, in so doing, to make their concerns our own. The principle of partnership lies at the heart of Smith’s conception of capitalism and his view of what makes it so successful.

Adam Smith also believed that the market can function properly only within a broader institutional and moral context, one that has become all the more essential in today’s interdependent world. Markets require the provision of public goods such as education, defense, and infrastructure. They also require certain values. As Amartya Sen, the

MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIRMAN


In 1989, Warren Buffett looked back on a quarter century of investing, and he asked himself what he had learned. His most surprising discovery:

“…the overwhelming importance in business of an unseen force that we might call ‘the institutional imperative’,” namely, the tendency of companies to “mindlessly imitate” their peers.

The most successful businesses are also the most distinctive. They are those that consistently find a way to resist the institutional imperative and to set themselves apart. William Thorndike wrote a compelling book, The Outsiders, which defined what the best businesses had in common. Based on research of fifty years of company results, he found that the most successful businesses and their leaders all share an “intelligent iconoclasm.” They are “determinedly different, proudly eccentric”— but always in thoughtful and highly strategic ways.

These businesses share a common trait: they maintain their intelligent iconoclasm through a relentless commitment to a core purpose and shared values. They have the courage to be different because they believe in something greater than themselves.

At Barrick, we find that courage in the pursuit of our core purpose: to create wealth not just for our owners, but also for our people and the communities with which we work.

This model is consistent with history’s most successful businesses, all of which were effectively run as partnerships. In the past fifty years, the leaders who delivered the greatest returns saw their job, almost exclusively, as allocating capital—both human and financial. They found the right people to run the right assets and left it to those managers to grow free cash flow per share, which the business leaders then invested to meet rigorous expectations for returns.

A partnership culture is Barrick’s most authentic, distinctive, and sustainable competitive advantage. By treating our partners’ interests as our own, we become the preferred partner of host governments and communities, the most sought-after employer among the world’s best talent, and the natural choice for the most thoughtful long-term investors. Our approach to every one of our relationships must be to ask: How would we want this to go if the positions were reversed?

The natural corollary of a commitment to partnership is a focus on creating value sustainably and for the long term. One does not create or build trust overnight; it takes consistent fidelity to a partner’s interests—both as they are today and as they will be indefinitely into the future.

The perils of a short-term, self-interested approach to mining are now painfully clear. Throughout the decade-long bull market for gold, companies made investments on the premise that gold prices would rise indefinitely. The market, for its part, rewarded growth in ounces, betting that rising gold prices would make projects with low rates of return more attractive over time. Leaders were rewarded with cash payments in the short term. A few years later, mines built at the height of the boom were operating at a loss, followed by large write-downs across the industry.

Barrick was no exception. We have been working tirelessly to return to our tradition of partnership and our commitment to creating long-term value per share for all our partners. We are intent on rebuilding confidence and trust.

5

Nobel Prize-winning economist, notes: “Commercial exchange could not effectively take place until business morality made contractual behavior sustainable and inexpensive—not requiring constant suing of defaulting contractors, for example. Investment in productive businesses could not flourish until the higher rewards from corruption had been moderated. Profit-oriented capitalism has always drawn on support from other institutional values.”1 Chief among these values, Adam Smith believed, is trust: the confidence that market participants will in fact do what they say they will. Without trust, confidence crumbles and transactions become impossible. The freezing of credit during the recent financial crisis was a vivid example. The world is as interdependent as it has ever been, which makes trust more vital than ever, and the best means of fostering and maintaining trust is through a commitment to partnership.

The mining industry is a perfect case study, because mining is at heart a partnership business. Companies must receive and maintain permission from national, regional, and municipal governments to extract resources. They must recruit, train, and work with the members of the communities where they operate. They must serve the broader societal needs of those communities, including the health and education of their workers’ families. They must ensure the long-term sustainability of natural ecosystems. They must leave behind an enduring contribution. The situation could not be farther from zero-sum, particularly when one considers that every one of these relationships is a shared enterprise that lasts decades. For a mining concern, the interests of one’s partners just are one’s own interests. In mining there is only “us.”


John L. Thornton Executive Chairman

1. Amartya Sen. “Capitalism Beyond the Crisis.” New York Review of Books. March 26, 2009.

In the ensuing letter from our President, Kelvin Dushnisky, you will read in some depth what one might call the base case for how we will achieve this overarching objective. In itself, that base case is solid, impressive, and reassuring. It rests on two foundational principles. One is a profound understanding of and commitment to the idea that in the 21st century, our core business is building partnerships of real depth and trust with host governments, local communities, NGOs, indigenous people, and others. At their invitation and with their support, we take their minerals out of their ground, and in so doing create wealth for all. Two of our recent appointments to the Board, Brian Greenspun and Michael Evans, were made in meaningful part because of their extensive experience doing exactly that. The other principle is a relentless commitment to operational excellence, reflected in our goal to bring down our all-in sustaining costs to below $700 per ounce by the end of 2019.

However, we must and we will go beyond that base case. We will do so primarily in two ways.

One, we will, over time, prove to you that we are not only discerning sellers, as we began to demonstrate this past year with the sale of various interests in seven of our assets—accomplished, as we all know, in difficult markets. We will demonstrate that we are also discerning buyers, capable of consistently creating value per share for our owners.

MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIRMAN


That starts with doing exactly what we say we are going to do. In 2015, we achieved every strategic objective we laid out at the beginning of the year. We reduced our debt by $3 billion, nearly a quarter of our total debt. We reduced our all-in sustaining costs from $864 to $831 per ounce. We simplified our head office, eliminated management between it and the mines, and accelerated the pace at which information flows between them. We pared down our portfolio, implemented a new system for allocating capital with strict investment criteria, and sold, canceled, or deferred investment in several assets that did not meet those requirements. We renewed our talent among both our management team and our Board.

The second step in rebuilding a partnership culture is to make leaders owners. All of our directors and partners will, over time, become meaningful owners whose net worth is tied to the shares of Barrick. It is our intention that, over time, every person at Barrick will become a shareholder and owner.

Finally, being partners means being transparent. We will be straightforward and open with you, so that you understand and believe in the process by which we arrive at our decisions.

With that in mind, here is our vision for the company going forward.

We start with one immutable truth—everything we do is focused on one goal: creating value per share for our owners, as measured by cash flow per share.

The senior leadership developed a new plan: focus not just on players’ performance, but on their character, and do so by fostering a new set of shared team values. Leadership was devolved to the players, who were encouraged to take individual responsibility and initiative. Coaches created a culture of continuous learning and improvement. Practices became even more brutal than games. Most importantly, players developed ritual behaviors around a new core narrative that connected the team’s greatest traditions to the demands of the present moment.

The results? Over the next seven years, the team performed better than they ever had, beating their historical record of achievement—already the world’s greatest—by nearly 15 percent.

That is the kind of execution we will return to the core of our work at Barrick. While we have made progress and our performance is improving, there is much more to do, and we consider it an honor and privilege to do that work on behalf of you, our partners and fellow owners.

7

Two, we will also, over time, transform Barrick into a mining company for this century by re-conceptualizing the essence of how one builds value in this industry.

We have already intentionally chosen a model that is different from our peers. I am reminded of John Templeton’s admonition, “If you want superior performance, you must be different.” We agree. It is who we are and who we were—until we lost our way in recent years. It is Barrick’s authentic DNA.

We will embody that DNA in a way that is all the more relevant by making the best use of technology and data, embedding them into our every fiber. They will make us better, they will make us faster—and they will make us safer. We will do this carefully, deliberately, and with an uncompromising eye on return on invested capital. But we will do it. In the end, we want to be among the very best 21st century companies, not just in our industry, but in any industry.

In the fullness of time, we believe Barrick will be both the lowest-risk investment of its kind and the one creating the most value.

The gold mining sector has yet to drag itself out of the last century, and at Barrick we are restless. We will be a 21st century mining company—one doing business for all our owners, with conviction and the courage to be different.

In 2004, the All Blacks—the New Zealand national rugby team, which over the past hundred years had statistically become the most successful sports team in history—started to slip. Morale was plummeting, and the team was in disarray.


We start with one immutable truth–everything we do is focused on one goal: creating value per share for our owners, as measured by cash flow per share.

John L. Thornton Executive Chairman

Ultimately, we are focused on generating returns for our shareholders in any foreseeable gold price environment, and that is how we are running the business today. But to deliver on this vision, we had to make fundamental changes at the company, changes that will set Barrick up for long-term success. We began with four key priorities for 2015: ¡ Streamline the organization through the implementation of a lean, decentralized operating model¡ Strengthen the balance sheet ¡ Maximize free cash flow through greater capital discipline and cost management¡ Re-focus the portfolio on high-quality assets in our core regions

While there is still work to be done, we have made substantive progress in each of these areas. The decentralized operating model that once characterized Barrick has been recreated and updated. We further shrunk our Toronto office from 240 positions to 150 and closed or downsized a number of regional offices, eliminating management layers between the head office and the mines. The result has been an unclogging of the arteries— a leaner, nimbler, more efficient company.

Under the decentralized model, head office is focused on setting strategy, allocating capital, and managing talent, along with meeting the regulatory

MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT


Kelvin Dushnisky President

In many respects, 2015 was a foundational year for Barrick. We started by setting out a clear vision: to be the leading mining company focused on gold, growing our cash flow per share by developing and operating high-quality assets through disciplined capital allocation and operational excellence.

flow generation. We sold the Cowal mine in Australia and several non-core assets in Nevada at very competitive valuations. We completed an innovative streaming agreement on a portion of our gold and silver production from the Pueblo Viejo mine in the Dominican Republic. Lastly, we formed two new and important partnerships, one with Zijin Mining at the Porgera mine in Papua New Guinea and the other with Antofagasta Minerals at the Zaldívar copper mine in Chile.

Our joint-venture agreements not only contribute to our debt reduction efforts, they offer significant strategic advantages. Zijin is the largest gold producer in China and a global leader in mining technology, engineering, and construction; Antofagasta has unrivaled knowledge of mining in Chile. On a broader level, these agreements underscore our recognition that we do not have to do it all ourselves.

9

requirements of running a public company. Our operational leaders in the field are empowered to think and act like business owners, and to maximize free cash flow from their operations with a focus on long-term value creation.

There is now a direct line of communication between the mines and head office, which means information is shared more quickly, and problems are identified and resolved sooner. We have built a technology-enabled network that connects our leadership teams to one another and effectively creates one company team with a shared knowledge base. Rather than a few people at the top of the company making decisions with limited participation from the actual operations, we now have our best operational minds working with one another, free from bureaucratic constraint.

As a result of these improvements, our leadership teams are displaying more initiative, ingenuity, and emotional ownership. They make decisions faster and more effectively, proactively share best practices with one another, and innovate together.

Another key priority last year was to strengthen our balance sheet. We committed to reducing our debt by $3 billion in 2015 and we did so swiftly and prudently. We achieved this through non-core asset sales, joint ventures and partnerships, and free cash

Above: In a prime example of Barrick’s original decentralized model in action, Cortez beat its 2015 operating guidance by collaborating with Goldstrike on a metal plan to optimize cash flow from both mines through Goldstrike’s processing facilities.


1Streamline the Business

While restoring our balance sheet is critical to our long-term success, so too is our ability to maximize free cash flow from our operations. Indeed, Barrick’s early success was rooted in its ability to generate wealth by consistently growing free cash flow. It was once our overriding priority. It is now our overriding priority again—and we are beginning to see results. Last year, we recorded $471 million in free cash flow, marking the first year we have delivered free cash flow since 2011. And we were free cash flow positive despite a gold price drop of more than $100 per ounce in 2015. Gold, in fact, is down more than $500 per ounce over the last three years, and the following data point underscores the extent of our transformation in the face of a challenging metal price environment. To be free cash flow breakeven in 2012, we would have required a gold price of more than $1,800 per ounce. In 2015, we generated free cash flow at $1,157 per ounce—and this year we are focused on improving our breakeven price down to $1,000 per ounce.

We made substantial progress last year in lowering our operating costs and becoming a more efficient and innovative operator. We reduced our all-in sustaining costs to $831 per ounce, well below our original guidance of $860–$895 per ounce.

We can benefit from other companies with expertise and experience and, at the same time, share risks.

Altogether, we reduced our total debt by $3.1 billion, or 24 percent, to $10 billion. We ended 2015 with $2.5 billion of cash and an additional $4 billion available on our fully undrawn credit facility. We also extended the termination date on the majority of the funds in the credit facility, and amended the financial covenant to better reflect our deleveraging measures. Our debt repayment schedule is modest, with less than $250 million due before 2018, and about half of our outstanding debt due after 2032.

Our goal is to have a strong, investment grade rated balance sheet. We must continue to lower our debt and we intend to do so by at least $2 billion in 2016. We will do so through additional non-core asset sales, joint ventures, and partnerships; by increasing free cash flow from operations; and with proceeds from asset sales that have already been completed. In the medium term, we aim to reduce our total debt to below $5 billion. We will pursue debt reduction initiatives in a disciplined manner, only taking actions that make sense for our business and for our shareholders.



2Strengthen the Balance Sheet

them. Our aspiration is to reduce our all-in sustaining costs to below $700 per ounce by 2019. We intend to achieve this by implementing our Best in Class program—a data-driven system designed to maximize value from our operations by improving productivity and reducing costs across our portfolio. It will require our leaders to find new and better ways to do things, such as eliminate waste, improve execution, optimize systems, and drive innovation.It will also integrate existing improvement initiatives associated with our value realization studies and the $2 billion cash flow improvement target we set last year.

11

This year, we expect our all-in sustaining costs to be $775–$825 per ounce, the lowest among senior producers.

As a result of this disciplined approach—including our 15 percent hurdle rate for any new investment—we reduced attributable capital spending by nearly $700 million last year. In total, capital expenditures fell 32 percent in 2015 to $1.5 billion from $2.2 billion a year earlier.

Our mine portfolio is now more focused than ever and offers exceptional leverage to higher gold prices, underpinned by our five core mines in the Americas—Cortez, Goldstrike, Pueblo Viejo, Lagunas Norte, and Veladero. Together, those operations accounted for 62 percent of our 2015 production at average all-in sustaining costs of $660 per ounce. At 1.88 grams per tonne, these mines also have an average reserve grade more than double that of our peers.

We produced 6.12 million ounces of gold in 2015, in line with our revised guidance. This year, we are anticipating production of 5.0–5.5 million ounces, and based on our current asset mix, we expect to maintain production of at least 4.5 million ounces through 2020.

Ultimately, our production will be defined by quality, not quantity. We may produce fewer ounces, but we will generate significantly more cash from

Above: Growing free cash flow per share for our owners is Barrick’s number one priority. Our Goldstrike mine in Nevada is a key contributor to this goal—the mine posted another +1 million ounce year in 2015, with its new TCM circuit reaching commercial production in the third quarter.

Left: The Turquoise Ridge underground operation in Nevada is Barrick’s highest grade mine, with an average reserve grade of over 15 grams per tonne. Maximizing cash flow from its high-quality operations is one of the levers Barrick intends to use to reduce total debt by a further $2 billion in 2016.


3Maximize Free Cash Flow

4Focus on Best Assets and Regions

Given the challenging metal price environment, we felt it was prudent to calculate our reserves and resources using a gold price assumption of $1,000 per ounce for 2016–2020 and a long-term gold price of $1,200 per ounce thereafter, compared to a flat price assumption of $1,100 per ounce in 2014. The near-term assumption underscores our determination to maximize free cash flow and shareholder returns in any metal price environment. We closed 2015 with reserves of 92 million ounces, down slightly from 93 million ounces in 2014, after adding 5 million ounces from drilling and cost reductions, and adjusting for depletion, the gold price change, and asset divestments.

Exploration expertise remains a competitive advantage for Barrick. Since 1990, we have discovered 142 million ounces of gold at an overall discovery cost of $25 per ounce, roughly half the average industry finding cost. Approximately 85 percent of our original 2015 exploration budget of $220–$260 million was allocated to our core regions in the Americas, where our teams have uncovered some of the largest gold discoveries in recent decades, including Lagunas Norte in Peru and Goldrush in Nevada.

The Goldrush project already contains 8.6 million ounces of measured and indicated resources, and 1.6 million ounces of inferred resources, and we



Looking ahead, we intend to build on the strategic priorities that we set in 2015. Our long-term strategy will be distinguished by a focus on margin growth over ounce growth, transparent priorities that govern the way capital is allocated, and investment and operating behavior that is gold price agnostic. I want to stress the last point. By adhering strictly to our disciplined investment and operating criteria, irrespective of the gold price, we will be well positioned to endure periods of gold price volatility and enjoy superior leverage to a rising gold price. We have an asset portfolio that includes the largest inventory of gold reserves and resources in our industry—a large portion of which are situated in our core regions in the Americas. These are jurisdictions where we have proven operating experience, a critical mass of infrastructure, technical and operational expertise, and established partnerships with suppliers, host governments, and communities.

Above: Barrick sold seven non-core assets in 2015 to further focus our portfolio in the Americas around top-tier mines like Pueblo Viejo—one of the world’s largest and lowest cost gold mines with 2015 AISC of $597 per ounce. Its four autoclaves handle nearly three times the volume of those Barrick pioneered at Goldstrike.

upfront capital investment and substantially increase returns. At Cerro Casale in Chile, our planners are evaluating a scenario that would reduce the initial capital investment while delivering double-digit returns.

At Pascua-Lama, located on the Chilean-Argentine border, we have been successful in substantially reducing our holding costs while we look to optimize the economics of the project. Our temporary suspension plan has been approved by the mining authorities in both countries. This will enable us to complete the transition to deep suspension and should allow us to further reduce future holding costs.

Nothing is more important to Barrick than the safety, health, and well-being of our colleagues and their families. In 2015, we continued an 11-year trend of reducing our total reportable injury frequency rate (TRIFR). Since 2005, our TRIFR has improved by 84 percent from 2.79 to 0.46. While we are pleased with this trend, this performance was, tragically, overshadowed by three fatalities in 2015. One fatality is too many, let alone three, and we pledge to redouble our efforts to live up to our vision for every one of our people to go home safe and healthy every day.

As I said at the outset of this letter, we are making significant progress as we restore the character and culture that helped make Barrick into a great company. We demonstrated reliable execution in 2015 thanks to the tireless dedication and commitment of our people around the world, and we intend to make such consistent, high-level delivery core to our culture in 2016 and the years ahead.

In closing, I want to thank our Board and our Executive Chairman, John Thornton, for their counsel and guidance through this foundational year for Barrick. I would also like to thank our many investors, both long-standing and those new to Barrick, for their valuable feedback and support in 2015.

Focus on Best Assets and Regions

13

are excited about its potential. Located only six kilometers from our Cortez operation, we expect to convert those ounces into reserves as we permit and develop the underground exploration declines, establish additional underground access, and complete infill drilling.

Last year, we announced a significant new gold discovery known as Alturas. Located in the Andes Mountains in Chile, the project is situated in one of the most fertile and exceptionally well mineralized districts in the world. Technically, Alturas has some traits similar to two of our core mines, Veladero and Lagunas Norte. We have reported an initial inferred resource of 5.5 million ounces of gold and expect to progress to the prefeasibility stage later this year.

Our portfolio also includes some of the world’s largest undeveloped gold deposits, including Donlin Gold, Cerro Casale and Pascua-Lama. Our share of these longer-term projects offers leverage to higher gold prices with 33 million ounces of gold in reserves and more than 28 million ounces in measured and indicated resources.

We are working to optimize the economics of these projects while spending the minimum required to maintain them as potential development options. At the Donlin Gold project in Alaska, for example, we are working with our JV partners on a scenario that could significantly reduce the project’s


Kelvin Dushnisky President

C. William D. BirchallNon-IndependentToronto, Ontario Former Vice Chairman, Barrick Gold Corporation

Gustavo A. CisnerosIndependentSanto Domingo, Dominican Republic Chairman, Cisneros Group of Companies

Kelvin P.M. DushniskyNon-IndependentToronto, Ontario President, Barrick Gold Corporation

J. Michael Evans Independent New York, New York President, Alibaba Group Holding Ltd.

Brian L. Greenspun Independent Henderson, Nevada Publisher and Editor, Las Vegas Sun and Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Greenspun Media Group

J. Brett Harvey Independent Canonsburg, Pennsylvania Chairman, CONSOL Energy Inc.

Nancy H.O. Lockhart Independent Toronto, Ontario Corporate Director

Dambisa Moyo Independent New York, New York International Economist and Commentator

Anthony MunkNon-IndependentToronto, Ontario Senior Managing Director, Onex Corporation (Finance and Acquisitions)

J. Robert S. PrichardIndependentToronto, Ontario Chairman, Bank of Montreal, Torys LLP and Metrolinx

Steven J. Shapiro Independent Silverthorne, Colorado Corporate Director

John L. ThorntonNon-IndependentPalm Beach, Florida Executive Chairman, Barrick Gold Corporation

Ernie L. Thrasher Independent Latrobe, Pennsylvania Chief Executive Officer and Chief Marketing Officer, Xcoal Energy & Resources

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

14

Board of Directors


Directors Dambisa Moyo (left)

and John Thornton

Directors Nancy Lockhart (center)

and William Birchall (right) toured

Goldstrike in December with a stop

overlooking the Betze-Post open pit.

Directors Ernie Thrasher (left),

Brett Harvey and Steven Shapiro

Audit Committee(S.J. Shapiro, D. Moyo, E.L. Thrasher)Supports the Board in its oversight of Barrick’s financial reporting process and the quality, transparency, and integrity of Barrick’s financial statements and other related public disclosures, the company’s internal controls over financial reporting, the company’s compliance with legal and regulatory requirements relevant to financial reporting, the external auditor’s qualifications and independence, and the performance of the internal audit function and the external auditor.

Compensation Committee(J.B. Harvey, G.A. Cisneros, J.R.S. Prichard, S.J. Shapiro, E.L. Thrasher)Supports the Board in designing, monitoring and reviewing Barrick’s compensation policies and practices, and administering Barrick’s share compensation plans. The Committee is responsible for reviewing and recommending director and executive compensation.

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE AND COMMITTEES OF THE BOARD

Corporate Governance

Committees of the Board

Our Board is committed to acting in the best interests of the company and its shareholders. Sound corporate governance practices contribute to achieving our strategic and operational plans, goals, and objectives.

The Board of Directors has approved a set of Corporate Governance Guidelines to promote the effective functioning of the Board of Directors and its Committees and to set forth a common set of expectations as to how the Board should manage its affairs and perform its responsibilities. Barrick has also adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics that is applicable to all directors, officers, and employees of Barrick. In conjunction with the adoption of the Code, Barrick established a compliance hotline to allow for anonymous reporting by telephone or Internet portal of any suspected Code violations, including concerns

regarding accounting, internal accounting controls or other auditing matters. A copy of the Corporate Governance Guidelines, the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, and the mandates of the Board of Directors and each of the Committees of the Board is posted on Barrick’s website at www.barrick.com/company/governance and is available in print from the company to any shareholder upon request.

Mr. J.B. Harvey is Barrick’s Lead Director. The Lead Director facilitates the functioning of the Board independently from management, serves as an independent leadership contact for directors and executive officers, and assists in maintaining and enhancing the quality of the company’s corporate governance.

Corporate Governance & Nominating Committee(G.A. Cisneros, N.H.O. Lockhart, B.L. Greenspun, D. Moyo)Supports the Board in establishing Barrick’s corporate governance policies and practices, identifying individuals qualified to become directors, reviewing the composition and functioning of the Board and its Committees, and succession planning for senior executives.

Corporate Responsibility Committee(N.H.O. Lockhart, C.W.D. Birchall, B.L. Greenspun, E.L. Thrasher)Supports the Board in overseeing Barrick’s programs and performance relating to environmental, health and safety, corporate social responsibility, and human rights matters.

Risk Committee(J.M. Evans, C.W.D. Birchall, D. Moyo, A. Munk, J.R.S. Prichard)Supports the Board in overseeing the company’s management of enterprise risks, and monitoring and reviewing the company’s financial structure, and investment and financial risk management programs.

15Barrick Gold Corporation | Annual Report 2015 15

Members

Aron CramerSan Francisco, California President and Chief Executive Officer, Business for Social Responsibility (BSR)

Robert FowlerOttawa, Ontario Former Canadian public servant; Deputy Minister of National Defence (1989–1995), Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the United Nations (1995–2000), Ambassador to Italy (2000–2006)

Gare A. SmithWashington, DC Partner, Foley Hoag, LLP Chair, Corporate Social Responsibility and Federal Affairs Practice

Special Consultant

John G. RuggieCambridge, Massachusetts Berthold Beitz Professor in Human Rights and International Affairs, Kennedy School of Government

Affiliated Professor in International Legal Studies, Harvard Law School

International Advisory Board

The International Advisory Board was established to provide advice to Barrick’s Board of Directors and management on geo-political and other strategic issues affecting the company.

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND ADVISORY BOARDS


John L. ThorntonExecutive Chairman

Kelvin P.M. DushniskyPresident

Kevin J. Thomson Senior Executive Vice President, Strategic Matters

Shaun A. Usmar Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

Catherine RawExecutive Vice President, Business Performance

Darian K. RichExecutive Vice President, Talent Management

Richard J.E. Williams Chief Operating Officer

Kathy SiposChief of Staff

Executive Officers

16

Chairman

The Right Honourable Brian Mulroney Canada Prime Minister 1984–1993

Members

His Excellency José María Aznar Spain Prime Minister 1996–2004

The Honourable John R. Baird Canada Minister of Foreign Affairs 2011–2015

Gustavo A. Cisneros Dominican Republic Chairman, Cisneros Group of Companies

Secretary William S. Cohen United States Senator 1979–1997 and Secretary of Defense 1997–2001

The Honorable Newt Gingrich United States Speaker of the House of Representatives 1995–1999

The Honourable Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg Germany Federal Minister of Defense 2009–2011

Vernon E. Jordan, Jr. United States Senior Counsel, Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, L.L.P.

Andrónico Luksic Chile Vice Chairman, Banco de Chile

Peter Munk Canada Founder and Chairman Emeritus, Barrick Gold Corporation

Lord Charles Powell of Bayswater KCMG United Kingdom Foreign Policy Advisor to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher 1983–1991

John L. Thornton United States Chairman, Barrick Gold Corporation

Corporate Social Responsibility Advisory Board

Barrick’s Corporate Social Responsibility Advisory Board was formed in 2012 and acts as an external sounding board on a range of corporate responsibility issues, including community relations, sustainable development, water, energy, climate change, security and human rights.

Barrick Gold Corporation | Financial Report 2015 17

Partners

In Barrick’s early years, the company’s founder, Peter Munk, led a small group of exceptional people who worked together as a team. They knew each other well, and they trusted each other completely. They shared responsibility and accountability for the company’s success and for its setbacks. Their personal wealth was tied to the company’s fortunes, which gave them every incentive to work together as efficiently and effectively as possible.

To accelerate emotional and financial ownership among our people today, we have created a new Barrick partnership that includes the most committed and passionate leaders across the company.

Mejico Angeles Sam Ash Nigel Bain Rick Baker Andrew Baumen Michael Brown Curtis Cadwell John Cash Gordon Chiu Andy Cole Jaco Crouse Jonathan Drimmer Kelvin Dushnisky

Mike Estes Dave Forestell Sergio Fuentes Manuel Fumagalli Matt Gili Brian Grebenc Rich Haddock Andrew Hastings Alanna Heath George Joannou Naomi Johnson Rob Krcmarov Woo Lee

Andy Lloyd Bill MacNevin Basie Maree Melanie Miller Marian Moroney Giovanna Moscoso Deni Nicoski Calvin Pon Catherine Raw Darian Rich François Robert Manuel Rocha Rick Sims

Peter Sinclair Kathy Sipos Ettiene Smuts Kevin Thomson Shaun Usmar Johan Van Jaarsveld Greg Walker Cody Whipperman James Whittaker Richard Williams Alex Wilson

Financial Report

Management’s Discussion and Analysis 18 | Mineral Reserves and Resources 87 Financial Statements 99 | Notes to Financial Statements 104 | Shareholder Information 171

Barrick Gold Corporation | Financial Report 201518

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

Management’s Discussion and Analysis (“MD&A”)

Management’s Discussion and Analysis (“MD&A”) is intended to help the reader understand Barrick Gold Corporation (“Barrick”, “we”, “our” or the “Company”), our operations, financial performance and the present and future business environment. This MD&A, which has been prepared as of February 17, 2016, should be read in conjunction with our audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2015. Unless otherwise indicated, all amounts are presented in U.S. dollars.

For the purposes of preparing our MD&A, we consider the materiality of information. Information is considered material if: (i) such information results in, or would reasonably be expected to result in, a significant change in the market price or value of our shares; or

Certain information contained or incorporated by reference in this MD&A, including any information as to our strategy, projects, plans or future financial or operating performance constitutes “forward-looking statements”. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, are forward-looking statements. The words “believe”, “expect”, “anticipate”, “contemplate”, “target”, “plan”, “objective”, “intend”, “project”, “continue”, “budget”, “estimate”, “potential”, “may”, “will”, “can”, “could” and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements. In particular, this MD&A contains forward-looking statements including, without limitation, with respect to cash flow forecasts, projected capital, operating and exploration expenditures, targeted debt reductions and cash flow improvements, mine life and production rates, potential mineralization and metal or mineral recoveries, and expectations regarding future price assumptions, financial performance and other outlook or guidance. Forward-looking statements are necessarily based upon a number of estimates and assumptions that, while considered reasonable by the

(ii) there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable investor would consider it important in making an investment decision; or (iii) it would significantly alter the total mix of information available to investors. We evaluate materiality with reference to all relevant circumstances, including potential market sensitivity.

Continuous disclosure materials, including our most recent Form 40-F/Annual Information Form, annual MD&A, audited consolidated financial statements, and Notice of Annual Meeting of Shareholders and Proxy Circular will be available on our website at www.barrick.com, on SEDAR at www.sedar.com and on EDGAR at www.sec.gov. For an explanation of terminology unique to the mining industry, readers should refer to the glossary on page 86.

Company in light of management’s experience and perception of current conditions and expected developments, are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies. Known and unknown factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements and undue reliance should not be placed on such statements and information. Such factors include, but are not limited to: fluctuations in the spot and forward price of gold, copper or certain other commodities (such as silver, diesel fuel, natural gas and electricity); the speculative nature of mineral exploration and development; changes in mineral production performance, exploitation and exploration successes; diminishing quantities or grades of reserves; increased costs, delays, suspensions and technical challenges associated with the construction of capital projects; operating or technical difficulties in connection with mining or development activities, including disruptions in the maintenance or provision of required infrastructure and information technology systems;




failure to comply with environmental and health and safety laws and regulations; timing of receipt of, or failure to comply with, necessary permits and approvals; the impact of global liquidity and credit availability on the timing of cash flows and the values of assets and liabilities based on projected future cash flows; adverse changes in our credit ratings; the impact of inflation; fluctuations in the currency markets; changes in U.S. dollar interest rates; risks arising from holding derivative instruments; changes in national and local government legislation, taxation, controls or regulations and/or changes in the administration of laws, policies and practices, expropriation or nationalization of property and political or economic developments in Canada, the United States and other jurisdictions in which the Company does or may carry on business in the future; damage to the Company’s reputation due to the actual or perceived occurrence of any number of events, including negative publicity with respect to the Company’s handling of environmental matters or dealings with community groups, whether true or not; the possibility that future exploration results will not be consistent with the Company’s expectations; risks that exploration data may be incomplete and considerable additional work may be required to complete further evaluation, including but not limited to drilling, engineering and socio-economic studies and investment; risk of loss due to acts of war, terrorism, sabotage and civil disturbances; litigation; contests over title to properties, particularly title to undeveloped properties, or over access to water, power and other required infrastructure; business opportunities that may be presented to, or pursued by, the Company; our ability to successfully integrate acquisitions or complete divestitures; risks associated with working with partners in jointly controlled assets; employee relations; increased costs and risks related to the potential impact of climate change; availability and increased costs associated with mining inputs and labor; and the organization of our previously held African gold operations and properties under a separate listed company. In addition, there are risks and hazards associated with the business of mineral exploration, development and mining, including environmental hazards, industrial accidents, unusual or unexpected formations, pressures, cave-ins, flooding and gold bullion, copper cathode or gold or copper concentrate losses (and the risk of inadequate insurance, or inability to obtain insurance, to cover these risks). Many of these uncertainties and contingencies can affect our actual results and could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in any forward-looking statements made by, or on behalf of, us.

Index

20 Overview

20 Review of 2015 Results 27 Key Business Developments 31 Outlook for 2016 36 Risks and Risk Management 38 Market Overview

42 Review of Annual Financial Results

42 Revenue 42 Production Costs 43 Capital Expenditures 43 Additional Significant Statement of Income Items 45 Income Tax Expense

46 Financial Condition Review

46 Balance Sheet Review 46 Shareholders’ Equity 46 Comprehensive Income 47 Financial Position and Liquidity 49 Summary of Financial Instruments

49 Operating Segments Performance

73 Commitments and Contingencies

74 Review of Quarterly Results

75 Internal Control over Financial Reporting and Disclosure Controls and Procedures

76 IFRS Critical Accounting Policies and Accounting Estimates

76 Non-GAAP Financial Performance Measures

86 Glossary of Technical Terms

Readers are cautioned that forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance. All of the forward-looking statements made in this MD&A are qualified by these cautionary statements. Specific reference is made to the most recent Form 40-F/Annual Information Form on file with the SEC and Canadian provincial securities regulatory authorities for a more detailed discussion of some of the factors underlying forward-looking statements and the risks that may affect Barrick’s ability to achieve the expectations set forth in the forward-looking statements contained in this MD&A. We disclaim any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by applicable law.



Overview

Review of 2015 Results

For the three months ended For the years ended December 31 December 31

($ millions, except where indicated) 2015 2014 2015 2014

Financial DataRevenue $ 2,238 $ 2,510 $ 9,029 $ 10,239 Net earnings (loss)1 (2,622) (2,851) (2,838) (2,907) Per share (“EPS”)2 (2.25) (2.45) (2.44) (2.50) Adjusted net earnings3 91 174 344 793 Per share (“adjusted EPS”)2,3 0.08 0.15 0.30 0.68 Adjusted EBITDA 722 755 3,187 3,811 Total project capital expenditures4 (55) 121 13 234 Total capital expenditures – expansion4 6 90 137 391 Total capital expenditures – sustaining4 303 438 1,359 1,639 Operating cash flow5 698 371 2,794 2,296 Free cash flow3 $ 387 $ (176) $ 1,081 $ (136)

Operating Data

Gold Gold produced (000s ounces)6 1,619 1,527 6,117 6,249 Gold sold (000s ounces)6 1,636 1,572 6,083 6,284 Realized price ($ per ounce)3 $ 1,105 $ 1,204 $ 1,157 $ 1,265 Cash costs ($ per ounce)3 547 628 596 598 Cash costs on a co-product basis ($ per ounce)3 566 648 619 618 All-in sustaining costs ($ per ounce)3 733 925 831 864 All-in sustaining costs on a co-product basis ($ per ounce)3 752 945 854 884 All-in costs ($ per ounce)3 719 1,094 876 986 All-in costs on a co-product basis ($ per ounce)3 $ 738 $ 1,114 $ 899 $ 1,006

Copper Copper produced (millions of pounds) 138 134 511 436 Copper sold (millions of pounds) 132 139 510 435 Realized price ($ per pound)3 $ 2.16 $ 2.91 $ 2.37 $ 3.03 C1 cash costs ($ per pound)3 $ 1.66 $ 1.78 $ 1.73 $ 1.92 All-in sustaining costs ($ per pound)3 $ 2.15 $ 2.40 $ 2.33 $ 2.79

1. Net earnings/loss represents net earnings/loss attributable to the equity holders of the Company.2. Calculated using weighted average number of shares outstanding under the basic method.3. These are non-GAAP financial performance measures with no standardized definition under IFRS. For further information and detailed reconciliations, please see

pages 76 – 85 of this MD&A.4. These amounts are presented on a 100%, accrued basis. Project and expansion capital expenditures are included in our calculation of all-in costs, but not included

in our calculation of all-in sustaining costs.5. Operating cash flow includes a $610 million deposit received in third quarter 2015 related to the Pueblo Viejo gold and silver streaming transaction.6. Gold and copper production and sales include our pro rata share of Acacia, Pueblo Viejo and Zaldívar.



Full Year Financial and Operating HighlightsStrengthening the Balance Sheetn We set a debt reduction target of $3 billion in 2015. We said we would achieve this through the disciplined sale

of non-core assets, the formation of new joint ventures and partnerships, and by maximizing free cash flow from our operations. In 2015, we completed or announced asset sales, joint ventures, a streaming agreement and partnerships valued at $3.2 billion. In 2015, despite lower gold prices, we recorded positive free cash flow for the first time in four years, generating $471 million in free cash flow for the year (excluding the $610 million in proceeds from the Pueblo Viejo streaming transaction), reflecting the impact of our efforts to maximize free cash flow across the Company.

n In 2015, we reduced our total debt by $3.1 billion, or 24 percent, from $13.1 billion to $10 billion, over the same period, exceeding our original target of $3 billion. We currently have less than $250 million in debt due before 2018 and approximately $5 billion of our $10 billion in outstanding debt matures after 2032. In addition, we expect that the $3.1 billion in debt reduction will reduce pre-tax interest payments by approximately $135 million on an annualized basis.

n Our liquidity position is strong and continues to improve, with robust cash flow generation, modest near-term debt repayment obligations, a $4 billion undrawn credit facility that is now subject to a financial covenant that better reflects Barrick’s ongoing deleveraging efforts and a consolidated cash balance of approximately $2.5 billion. Subsequent to year-end, the Company received an additional $610 million in cash from the sale of Bald Mountain and 50% of Round Mountain.

n We intend to reduce our total debt by at least $2 billion in 2016 through the following levers: drawing on our cash balance; delivering free cash flow from operations; and selling additional non-core assets and creating new joint ventures and partnerships.

Cost Reductionsn This year, we have taken significant actions to improve

our business plans, resulting in increasing positive free cash flow in three consecutive quarters despite lower gold prices, reflecting the impact of greater cost and capital discipline across the Company. We remain focused on improving productivity and driving down costs to maximize free cash flow from our assets in any gold price environment.

n In 2015, we exceeded our overhead cost reduction target of $50 million for the year, and expect to reach $100 million in annualized overhead savings in 2016. We realized approximately $65 million in reductions in gross functional general and administrative and overhead costs compared to the prior year, allowing us to meet our corporate administration expense target of $145 million in 2015, after adjusting for severance and other one-time costs.

n Our continued focus on disciplined capital allocation, lower capital spending, combined with reductions in corporate overhead and other operating cost savings, helped us to achieve a $33 per ounce reduction in our all-in sustaining costs for the year, from $864 per ounce in 2014 to $831 per ounce in 2015, allowing us to meet the lower end of our revised 2015 guidance range of $830 to $870 per ounce.

OriginalGuidance

2015

Revised Q2Guidance

2015

Revised Q3Guidance

2015

Actual 2015

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

ALL-IN SUSTAINING COSTS 2015 ($ per ounce)

880to

840

870to

830

831895to

860

OriginalGuidance

2015

Revised Q1Guidance

2015

Revised Q2Guidance

2015

Revised Q3Guidance

2015

Actual 2015

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 2015 ($ millions)

2,100to

1,8001,900

to1,600

1,7001,509

2,200to

1,900



n In 2016, we have implemented a Best in Class program designed to maximize value creation from our operations by driving improvements in efficiency and productivity, as well as sustainable reductions in costs, across our portfolio. The initiative will bring together in a single system all of our existing and future improvement initiatives – those already identified in our Value Realization studies, as well as those associated with our $2 billion cash flow improvement target.

n Our temporary suspension plan for Pascua-Lama received approval by the mining authorities in Chile and Argentina in late 2015. Our focus in 2016 will remain on further reducing holding costs at the project in line with the temporary suspension plan, while advancing an optimized project plan, and as a result we expect 2016 expenditures at Pascua-Lama to be in the range of $80 million to $100 million. Implementation of the temporary suspension plan could require adjustments resulting from regulatory and legal actions and weather conditions, which could increase costs associated with the plan.

Operating Cash Flow, Free Cash Flow, Adjusted Net Earnings, Net Loss and Adjusted EBITDA

The net loss for 2015 was 1% lower than the prior year primarily due to a decrease in direct operating costs, a reduction in overhead costs and a decrease in income tax expense combined with the impact of recognizing $3.1 billion (net of tax and non-controlling interests) in impairment charges in 2015 compared to $3.4 billion (net of tax and non-controlling interests) in 2014. The decrease in direct operating costs reflects the continuous improvements made to our cost structure in 2015, which more than offset the impact of processing lower grade ore, lower realized gold and copper prices and lower gold sales volume compared to the prior year. In terms of overhead costs, we exceeded our cost reduction target of $50 million for the year, with $67 million in overhead cost savings in 2015. This was partially offset by a 9% and 22% decrease in gold and copper realized prices, respectively, combined with the

FACTORS AFFECTING ADJUSTED NET EARNINGS ($ millions)

793

(994)

+379

+542

(123)

+67

(216)

+67(171)

2014 Adjusted

net earnings

2015 Adjusted

net earnings

Gold andcopperrealized

price

Gold andcopper

cash costper tonneprocessed1

Income taxexpense

Overheadcosts2

Gold andcopper

sales volumeand grade

Hedges3 Depreciation4 Other5

344

UncontrollableCosts

ControllableCosts

1. Excludes the impact of realized losses on hedges and overhead costs allocated to the sites.2. Excludes the impact of severance, stock-based compensation, hedges, Acacia overhead costs and other one-off costs.3. Excludes hedges on fuel as well as CAD, AUD and CLP.4. Includes $28 million of catch-up depreciation relating to Australia.5. Primarily consists of closure costs, exploration and project expense, and unrealized gains/losses on foreign exchange.

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

Gold657

Copper337

Gold531

Copper11

Grade 165

Vol 51



FACTORS AFFECTING FREE CASH FLOW ($ millions)

(136)

+719

+437

+67

(994)

+223

+356

(216)

+15

2014 Free cash

flow

2015 Free cash

flow2

Capitalexpenditures

Overheadcosts1

Change inworkingcapital

Incometaxes

Gold andcopper

sales volumeand grade

Other directoperating

costs

Gold andcopperrealized

price

Other

471

1. Excludes the impact of severance, stock-based compensation, hedges, Acacia overhead costs and other one-off costs.2. 2015 free cash flow excludes $610 million deposit relating to the Pueblo Viejo streaming agreement and is before dividends.

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

Sustaining211

DivestedSites280

Gold657

Projects281

OtherSites157

Expansion227

Copper337

Copper11

Grade 165

Vol 51

Cash Costs345

C1 Costs11

Operating cash flow for 2015 of $2,794 million was 22% higher compared to the prior year reflecting the impact of improvements in our working capital mainly as a result of our efforts to optimize supply chain management combined with the impact of the divestment of our Cowal mine and our 50% interest in the Porgera mine, which had a favorable impact on working capital in 2015. Other factors positively impacting operating cash flow in 2015 was a decrease in income taxes paid as well as the $610 million deposit received in third quarter 2015 relating to the gold and silver streaming transaction on our Pueblo Viejo mine as described on page 28 of this MD&A. This was partially offset by the previously mentioned movements in adjusted net earnings.

Free cash flow for 2015 was $1,081 million, or $471 million after excluding the deposit on the gold and silver streaming agreement, reflecting an increase of 895% and 446%, respectively. This year, we have taken significant actions to improve our business plans, resulting in increasing positive free cash flow in three consecutive quarters despite lower gold prices, reflecting the impact of greater cost and capital discipline across the Company. The increase in free cash flow compared to the prior year reflects the higher operating cash flows resulting from improvements in working capital and a decrease in income taxes paid, combined with a decrease in direct operating costs resulting from the continuous improvements made to our cost structure in 2015. Further contributing to the increase in free cash flow was a reduction in capital expenditures in 2015 primarily as a result of lower minesite sustaining capital expenditures, a 94% reduction in project capital expenditures due to lower Pascua-Lama project spend, as we continue our efforts to reduce holding costs, combined with a decrease in minesite expansion capital expenditures.

realization of losses on fuel hedge contracts and lower gold sales volume. Adjusted net earnings of $344 million, excluding impairment charges and other adjusting items, in 2015 was 57% lower than the prior year, primarily due to the same factors negatively affecting the net loss. This was partially offset by cost reductions realized in general and administrative expense and cost of sales, an increase in copper sales volume and a decrease in cost of sales applicable to copper. For a full discussion of adjusting items impacting adjusted net earnings, see page 25 of this MD&A. For a breakdown of goodwill and asset impairment charges recognized in 2015, see page 44 of this MD&A.



Gold Production, Cash Costs and All-in Sustaining CostsGold production for 2015 was 2% lower than the prior year primarily due to lower grades at Pueblo Viejo and Veladero combined with the impact of the divestitures that occurred in the second half of 2015. The divested sites contributed an additional 135 thousand production ounces in 2014 compared to 2015. This was partially offset by an increase in production at Goldstrike, Cortez, and Turquoise Ridge.

The initiatives we have taken in 2015 to decrease costs resulted in a reduction in operating costs of approximately $380 million. Cash costs of $596 per ounce remained in line with the prior year, primarily due to a $96 million decrease in capitalized stripping costs, a $118 million increase in inventory impairment charges, and $123 million in unfavorable metals inventory movements compared to the prior year combined with the impact of lower sales volumes on unit production costs. This was partially offset by the savings reflected in the lower direct mining costs.

All-in sustaining costs for 2015 of $831 per ounce decreased 4% compared to the prior year primarily due to a 17% reduction in minesite sustaining capital expenditures, largely due to a decrease in capitalized stripping costs, partially offset by the impact of lower sales volume on unit production costs. All-in costs for 2015 were 11% lower than the prior year primarily due to a reduction in expansion and project capital

2013 2014 2015 2016E

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

7,166

GOLD PRODUCTION (000s ounces)

6,249 6,117 5,000

to5,500

2013 2014 2015 2016E

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

CASH COSTS AND ALL-IN SUSTAINING COSTS ($ per ounce)

598

864

596

831

550to

590

775to

825

566

915

AISC Cash costs

expenditures. The lower expansion capital expenditures are primarily a result of a reduction in costs related to the construction of the thiosulfate circuit at Goldstrike, which entered commercial production in third quarter 2015.

Copper Production and C1 CostsCopper production for 2015 increased 17% compared to the prior year primarily due to higher production at Lumwana, partially offset by a decrease in production at Zaldívar. Production at Lumwana was higher primarily as a result of the partial conveyor collapse that shut down the mill and concentrate production for much of second quarter 2014. The decreased production at Zaldívar reflects the divestment of 50% of our ownership in the mine that was completed on December 1, 2015. C1 cash costs in 2015 were 10% lower than the prior year due to the impact of higher sales volume on unit production costs combined with a decrease in cost of sales.

2013 20152014 2016E

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

539

COPPER PRODUCTION (millions of pounds)

436

511 370 to410



Capital ExpendituresCapital expenditures for 2015 were 33% lower than the prior year. In addition to the reduction in minesite sustaining capital expenditures, the decrease was also a result of a 94% reduction in project capital expenditures resulting from a reduction in Pascua-Lama project spend combined with a 65% decrease in minesite expansion capital expenditures due to the completion of the thiosulfate circuit at Goldstrike. For further details, refer to page 43 of this MD&A. For the year ended December 31, 2015, we incurred $1,509 million in capital expenditures.

Significant Adjusting ItemsSignificant adjusting items (net of tax and non-controlling interest effects) in 2015 include:n $3.1 billion in impairment charges comprised of

$2.2 billion in goodwill impairments primarily relating to our Goldstrike, Zaldívar and Pueblo Viejo mines and $947 million in asset impairments primarily related to our Pascua-Lama project and Pueblo Viejo mine;

n $177 million in unrealized foreign currency translation losses primarily related to our VAT recoverable in Argentina; and

n $118 million in costs arising from changes in the obsolescence provision relating to mine supplies inventory and inventory impairments at Buzwagi; partially offset by

n $263 million of gains on the sale of assets primarily related to the sale of our Cowal and Ruby Hill mines, 50% interest in our Porgera and Zaldívar mines and Spring Valley project; and

n $50 million in gains on the extinguishment of debt.

2013 2014 2015 2016E

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

CAPITAL EXPENDITURES ($ millions)

2,264

1,509

1,350to

1,650

5,375

Expansion Project Sustaining

(2,838)

NET LOSS TO ADJUSTED NET EARNINGS ($ millions)

3,119 177 59 9

263

81 34420

15 N

etlo

ss

Impa

irmen

tch

arge

s

Unr

ealiz

ed lo

sses

on

non-

hedg

e de

rivat

ives

Tax

adju

stm

ents

Gai

n on

sal

e of

ass

ets

Oth

er

Unr

ealiz

ed f

orei

gncu

rren

cy lo

sses

2015

Adj

uste

dne

t ea

rnin

gs

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000



SafetyNothing is more important to Barrick than the safety, health and well-being of workers and their families. In 2015, we continued a ten-year trend of improving our total reportable injury frequency rate1 (“TRIFR”) and since 2005, there has been an 84 percent improvement in the TRIFR (from 2.79 to 0.46). The foundation underpinning this improvement continues to be our Courageous Leadership program, which was updated in 2015 with a new program called “Courage to Care”. Courage to Care is designed to help Barrick make the next step in safety performance through a team approach. In addition we continue to focus on compliance on elements of the Barrick “Safety and Health Management System” with a significant improvement over the past two years in execution of the Occupational Health and Contractors Control elements of the system. Although we are pleased with these trends, this performance was overshadowed by the tragic occurrence of 3 fatal incidents in 2015. All 3 fatalities were associated with

heavy mobile mining equipment operations. Barrick continues to investigate safety improvements and completed a trial of collision avoidance technology at the Bald Mountain mine in October 2015. The results of this trial were positive and we expect to pilot this technology on a larger scale at one of our large North America sites in 2016.

Reserves and Resourcesn To calculate our 2015 reserves, we have applied a

short-term gold price assumption of $1,000 per ounce for the next five years, and a long-term gold price of $1,200 per ounce from 2021 onwards. This approach ensures a focus on maximizing free cash flow in the near term, without sterilizing future reserves that will be mined at gold prices in line with our long-term price assumption. The price assumptions we have used to calculate reserves are consistent with those we are using for mine planning, impairment testing and for the assessment of project economics.

n As of December 31, 2015, Barrick’s proven and probable gold reserves were 91.9 million ounces2, compared to 93.0 million ounces at the end of 2014. Approximately 3.1 million ounces were divested last year, and 6.8 million ounces were depleted through production and processing. We added approximately

5.1 million ounces to reserves through drilling and cost improvements, while 3.7 million ounces were added as a result of the use of a long-term gold price assumption of $1,200 per ounce, compared to a single reserve price of $1,100 applied in 2014.

n Significant additions to our 2015 proven and probable gold reserves include 3.5 million ounces at Veladero, 2.5 million ounces at Cortez and 1.6 million ounces at Lagunas Norte. We also added reserves at Kalgoorlie, Porgera, Hemlo and Pueblo Viejo.

n In 2015, measured, indicated and inferred resources were calculated using a gold price assumption of $1,300 per ounce. This compares to $1,400 per ounce in 2014. Measured and indicated gold resources were 79.1 million ounces2 at the end of 2015, compared to 94.3 million ounces at the end of 2014. Approximately 9 million ounces of measured and indicated gold resources were divested in 2015 and

1. Total reportable incident frequency rate (TRIFR) is a ratio calculated as follows: number of reportable injuries x 200,000 hours divided by the total number of hours worked. Reportable injuries include fatalities, lost time injuries, restricted duty injuries, and medically treated injuries.

2. Estimated in accordance with National Instrument 43-101 as required by Canadian securities regulatory authorities. For a breakdown and additional details on tonnes, grade and ounces, see pages 87 – 94. For United States reporting purposes, Industry Guide 7 under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (as interpreted by Staff of the SEC), applies different standards in order to classify mineralization as a reserve. Accordingly, for U.S. reporting purposes, approximately 1.70 million ounces of proven and probable gold reserves at Cortez and approximately 2.11 million ounces of proven and probable gold reserves at Lagunas Norte are classified as mineralized material.

2013 2014 2015

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

0.0

0.5

1.0

TOTAL REPORTABLE INJURY FREQUENCY

0.58 0.460.64



8.8 million ounces have been upgraded to proven and probable gold reserves. We added 8.5 million ounces to measured and indicated resources as a result of drilling and cost reductions, while 5.9 million ounces were removed as a result of a change in the gold price assumption.

n Inferred gold resources were 27.4 million ounces2 at the end of 2015, compared to 29.3 million ounces at the end of 2014. Approximately 2.8 million ounces were divested in 2015 and 10.4 million ounces were added as a result of drilling and cost reductions, including an initial 5.5 million ounce inferred resource at our Alturas discovery in Chile.

n Proven and probable copper reserves were calculated using a short-term copper price assumption of $2.75 per pound and a long-term price assumption of $3.00 per pound. Copper reserves decreased to 11.7 billion pounds2 at the end of 2015, from 14.9 billion pounds at the end of 2014, primarily driven by the sale of 50 percent of Zaldívar. Measured and indicated copper resources increased to 9.6 billion pounds2 compared to 5.9 billion pounds at the end of 2014, primarily driven by a reduction in Zambian royalty rates from 20 percent to 9 percent.

Exploration and Projects n We continue to add new reserves at existing

operations such as Cortez, Lagunas Norte and Hemlo, and we continue to convert resources to reserves at our operating mines. Looking farther ahead, there is still significant potential to discover new deposits in the Cortez district. We are currently exploring a target known as Fourmile, located one kilometer north of the Goldrush discovery, and six kilometers away from the existing Cortez Hills operation. This area is geologically similar to the high grade Deep Post and Deep Star deposits in the Goldstrike area. Early drilling has intersected mineralization well above the average grade of the measured and indicated resources at Goldrush.

n At Alturas in Chile, we have reported an initial inferred resource of 5.5 million ounces2 of gold. In 2016, our focus will be on continued infill drilling and step out

drilling to expand the resource. In addition, we expect to complete a scoping study in 2016. This deposit is geologically similar to the nearby Veladero mine. However, drilling results to date have yielded oxide mineralization at higher grades than Veladero, and preliminary leach tests appear favorable. We will provide a further update on the Alturas project at our upcoming Investor Day on February 22.

n Our portfolio contains a number of the world’s largest undeveloped gold deposits, including Goldrush, Donlin Gold, Cerro Casale and Pascua-Lama. These projects offer leverage to higher gold prices, with nearly 33 million ounces2 of gold in proven and probable reserves (Barrick’s share) and 37 million ounces2 in measured and indicated resources (Barrick’s share). In the short term we will work to optimize the economics of these projects, while spending the minimum required to maintain them as development options within our portfolio.

n We will provide a detailed update on projects at our upcoming Investor Day on February 22.

Key Business DevelopmentsDivestituresAs part of our debt reduction strategy discussed on page 21 of this MD&A, we completed several divestitures in the past year, the details of which are described below:

On January 11, 2016, we completed the sale of our Bald Mountain mine and our 50% interest in the Round Mountain mine to Kinross Gold Corporation for cash consideration of $610 million. As at December 31, 2015, all of the assets and liabilities of Bald Mountain and Round Mountain were classified as held-for-sale. As the agreed selling price is lower than the previously recognized carrying values, we recorded an impairment loss of $81 million in fourth quarter 2015.

On December 17, 2015, we completed the sale of our Ruby Hill mine and our 70% interest in the Spring Valley project to Waterton Precious Metals Fund II Cayman, LP for cash consideration of $110 million. As a result of the transaction, we recorded a gain on sale of $110 million in fourth quarter 2015.

2. Estimated in accordance with National Instrument 43-101 as required by Canadian securities regulatory authorities. For a breakdown and additional details on tonnes, grade and ounces, see pages 87 – 94. For United States reporting purposes, Industry Guide 7 under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (as interpreted by Staff of the SEC), applies different standards in order to classify mineralization as a reserve. Accordingly, for U.S. reporting purposes, approximately 1.70 million ounces of proven and probable gold reserves at Cortez and approximately 2.11 million ounces of proven and probable gold reserves at Lagunas Norte are classified as mineralized material.



On December 1, 2015, we completed the sale of 50% of our Zaldívar copper mine in Chile to Antofagasta Plc for total consideration of $1.005 billion. We received $950 million upon closing of the transaction, net of $10 million for working capital items, $20 million being held in escrow pending finalization of the working capital adjustment and the remaining $25 million will be received over the next five years. As the agreed selling price is lower than the previously recorded book value of the Zaldívar cash generating unit, we recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $427 million for the full year 2015. The transaction resulted in a loss of $16 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 based on movements in working capital from the date of announcement until the date of completing the transaction. The transaction remains subject to a net working capital adjustment period to complete the review of the working capital. The net working capital of Zaldívar (on a 100% basis) was $522 million as at December 1, 2015. We have determined that Zaldívar will be accounted for as a joint venture and upon closing we began accounting for our investment under the equity method. The purchase price allocation underlying our equity method investment and the ultimate gain/loss on disposition of our 50% of Zaldívar will be finalized when the working capital adjustment is finalized.

On August 31, 2015, we completed the sale of 50% of our interest in the Porgera mine in Papua New Guinea to Zijin Mining Group Company (“Zijin”) for cash consideration of $298 million. As a result of the transaction, we recorded a gain on sale of $24 million in third quarter 2015. We have determined that Porgera will be accounted for as a joint operation and have recognized our share of the assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses of the Porgera mine.

On July 23, 2015, we completed the sale of our Cowal mine in Australia for cash consideration of $550 million. As a result of the transaction, we recorded a gain on sale of $28 million in third quarter 2015.

Streaming TransactionOn September 29, 2015, we closed a gold and silver streaming transaction with Royal Gold, Inc. (“Royal Gold”) for production linked to Barrick’s 60 percent interest in the Pueblo Viejo mine. Royal Gold made an upfront cash payment of $610 million and will continue to make cash payments for gold and silver delivered under the agreement. The $610 million upfront payment is not repayable and Barrick is obligated to deliver gold and silver based on Pueblo Viejo’s production. We have accounted for the upfront payment as deferred revenue

and will recognize it in earnings, along with the ongoing cash payments, as the gold and silver is delivered to Royal Gold. We will also be recording accretion expense on the deferred revenue balance as the time value of the upfront deposit represents a significant component of the transaction.

Under the terms of the agreement, Barrick will sell gold and silver to Royal Gold equivalent to:n 7.5 percent of Barrick’s interest in the gold produced

at Pueblo Viejo until 990,000 ounces of gold have been delivered, and 3.75 percent thereafter.

n 75 percent of Barrick’s interest in the silver produced at Pueblo Viejo until 50 million ounces have been delivered, and 37.5 percent thereafter. Silver will be delivered based on a fixed recovery rate of 70 percent. Silver above this recovery rate is not subject to the stream.

Barrick will receive ongoing cash payments from Royal Gold equivalent to 30 percent of the prevailing spot prices for the first 550,000 ounces of gold and 23.1 million ounces of silver delivered. Thereafter payments will double to 60 percent of prevailing spot prices for each subsequent ounce of gold and silver delivered. Ongoing cash payments to Barrick are tied to prevailing spot prices rather than fixed in advance, maintaining exposure to higher gold and silver prices in the future.

Debt ManagementDebt repayments made in 2015 totaled $3.1 billion, which exceeded our target as discussed on page 21 of this MD&A. In addition to normal course repayments, we undertook a number of early debt retirements as detailed below:n On September 9, 2015, the Company redeemed the

outstanding $229 million aggregate principal amount of 2.90% notes due 2016 issued by Barrick.

n On October 15, 2015, the Company redeemed the outstanding $264 million aggregate principal amount of 5.75% notes due 2016 issued by a wholly-owned subsidiary.

n On October 28, 2015, the Company repurchased $834 million of principal relating to the 2.50% notes due 2018, 6.95% notes due 2019 and 3.85% notes due 2022 issued by Barrick.

n On December 30, 2015, the Company repurchased approximately $1.25 billion of principal relating to the 2.50% notes due 2018, 3.85% notes due 2022 and 4.10% notes due 2023 issued by Barrick.



Royalty Changes in Zambia In July 2015, the Zambian government passed amendments to the country’s mining tax regime that replaced the recently adopted 20% gross royalty on open pit mines with a 9% royalty, along with the reintroduction of a 30% corporate income tax, a 50% of taxable income limitation on the utilization of tax loss carryforwards, and a 15% variable profits tax. In third quarter 2015 we evaluated the potential for a reversal of previous impairments recorded in fourth quarter 2014. The current mine plan, lower short-term copper prices and a higher observable discount rate offset the lower royalty rate and therefore no impairment reversal was required.

Working with the Zambian Chamber of Mines, we continue to participate in consultations with the Government of Zambia on alternative royalty arrangements that better reflect the current copper price environment.

Zambia Power ReductionsIn second quarter 2015, the Zambian power authority (“ZESCO”) announced a reduction to power generation necessitated by the low water levels in its reservoirs as a result of the poor rainfall experienced during the recent rainy season. We are continuing to work with ZESCO to manage a monthly power cap and are focused on power usage efficiencies and savings to minimize the impact on production.

Jabal Sayid Financing FacilityOn April 2, 2015, Ma’aden Barrick Copper Company (our 50% Barrick-owned equity method investment) signed a financing agreement with the Saudi British Bank to finance the Jabal Sayid copper project for SAR 750 million ($200 million USD). The proceeds are being used to fund the expenditures remaining to bring the mine into commercial production. At the end of fourth quarter 2015, $60 million has been drawn on the financing facility.

Pascua-Lama Chilean Environmental Court RulingOn March 23, 2015, Chile’s Environmental Court ruled that the Pascua-Lama project has not damaged glaciers in the project area. The plaintiffs did not file an appeal and the matter is now closed.

Pascua-Lama SMA Regulatory Sanctions and Constitutional Protection Action On April 22, 2015, Chile’s environmental regulator (known as the SMA) reopened the administrative proceeding against Compañía Minera Nevada (“CMN”), Barrick’s Chilean subsidiary that holds the Chilean portion of the Pascua-Lama project (the “Project”) in accordance with the March 3, 2014 decision of the Environmental Court of Santiago, Chile. On May 14, 2015, CMN filed a petition to limit the scope of the new administrative proceeding to the original allegations considered by the environmental regulator at the time it issued the Resolution and to assert additional defenses. CMN presented supporting documents and witness testimony in January 2016 in response to an order from the SMA. The SMA also conducted a site visit in January 2016. A final resolution from the SMA in this matter is pending.

Also on April 22, 2015, CMN was notified that the SMA has initiated a new administrative proceeding for alleged deviations from certain requirements of the Project’s environmental approval, including with respect to the Project’s environmental impact and a series of monitoring requirements. In May 2015, CMN submitted a compliance program to address certain of the allegations and presented its defense to the remainder of the alleged deviations. The SMA rejected CMN’s proposed compliance program on June 24, 2015, and denied CMN’s administrative appeal of that decision on July 31, 2015. CMN appealed the SMA’s decision to the Environmental Court, which held a hearing on November 26, 2015. Decisions are pending from the Environmental Court with respect to CMN’s appeal and from the SMA with respect to CMN’s defense to the remainder of the alleged deviations. The new administrative proceeding against CMN is separate from the original administrative proceeding described above, and could result in additional sanctions including new administrative fines and/or the revocation of the Project’s environmental permit.

CMN filed a temporary and partial closure plan for the Pascua-Lama project (the “Temporary Closure Plan”) with the Chilean mining authority (Sernageomin) on August 31, 2015. Sernageomin approved the Temporary Closure Plan on September 29, 2015, and issued a



resolution requiring CMN to comply with certain closure-related maintenance and monitoring obligations for a period of two years. The Temporary Closure Plan does not address certain facilities, including the Project’s water management system, which remain subject to the requirements of the Project’s original environmental approval and other regulations.

On December 4, 2015, a constitutional protection action was filed in the Court of Appeals of Santiago, Chile by a group of local farmers and other individuals against CMN and Sernageomin in order to challenge the Temporary Closure Plan and the resolution that approved it. The plaintiffs assert that the Temporary Closure Plan cannot be approved until the water management system for the Project has been completed in accordance with the Project’s environmental permit. The action has been admitted for review by the court, which is expected to schedule a hearing in this matter prior to issuing a decision.

Refer to Note 35 to the Financial Statements for more information regarding these matters.

Hemlo Land AcquisitionIn March 2015, Barrick acquired certain surface and mineral lands adjacent to the Hemlo property in Ontario from subsidiaries of Newmont Mining Corporation for $37.5 million. The acquisition will enable Hemlo to realize additional value through near-term, lower-cost ounces, optimize its current operation, and increase exploration potential, which will allow for potential mine life extensions.

Alturas Gold DiscoveryIn first quarter 2015, we made a new gold discovery located in the Andean region of Chile. The new discovery is the result of a methodical re-evaluation of the El Indio belt led by our exploration team. At the end of 2015, we have reported an initial inferred resource of 5.5 million ounces of gold. For further details, see page 27 of this MD&A.

Exploration Partnership with QPXIn first quarter 2015, we formed a strategic partnership with Quantum Pacific Exploration (“QPX”) to explore for copper deposits on our land in northern Chile. Any gold deposits located on Barrick land will remain 100 percent Barrick-owned. If a copper deposit project is identified on either Barrick or QPX land, it will be 50 percent owned by each company. This agreement seeks to maximize the value of our highly prospective land holdings where there is currently little to no exploration taking place.

Management Structure RefinementsIn August 2015, Kelvin Dushnisky, most recently Co-President, was appointed President. Richard Williams, previously Chief of Staff, was appointed Chief Operating Officer and will report to Mr. Dushnisky. Basie Maree, most recently Senior Vice President, Technical Services was appointed Chief Technical Officer and Peter Sinclair, most recently Senior Vice President, Corporate Affairs was appointed Chief Sustainability Officer, both reporting to Mr. Williams. Jim Gowans, who made significant contributions to the company as Co-President, supported the transition as a Senior Advisor to the Chairman until his retirement from Barrick on December 31, 2015.

Board Resignations & AppointmentsIn 2015, the Board of Directors accepted the resignation of Ned Goodman, Founder of Dundee Corporation, as well as C. David Naylor, Professor of Medicine & President Emeritus, University of Toronto. The Board of Directors subsequently appointed J. Robert S. Prichard, current Chairman of Torys LLP, BMO Financial Group and Metrolinx, to serve as an independent director on Barrick’s Board. The Board of Directors also appointed Kelvin Dushnisky, current President of Barrick to the Board on February 17, 2016.



Outlook for 2016

Operating Unit GuidanceOur 2015 gold and copper production, cash costs, all-in sustaining costs and forecast gold production, cash costs and all-in sustaining costs ranges by operating unit for 2016 are as follows:

2015 2016 2016 2016 2015 2015 all-in forecast forecast forecast production cash costs sustaining production cash costs all-in sustaining Operating unit (000s ozs) ($/oz) costs ($/oz) (000s ozs) ($/oz) costs ($/oz)

Gold Cortez 999 $ 486 $ 603 900 – 1,000 $ 480 – $ 530 $ 640 – $ 710 Goldstrike 1,053 522 658 975 – 1,075 560 – 610 780 – 850 Pueblo Viejo (60%) 572 467 597 600 – 650 440 – 480 570 – 620 Lagunas Norte 560 329 509 410 – 450 380 – 420 570 – 640 Veladero 602 552 946 630 – 690 550 – 600 830 – 900

Total Core Mines 3,786 $ 480 $ 660 3,500 – 3,900 $ 490 – $ 540 $ 690 – $ 740

Turquoise Ridge (75%) 217 581 742 200 – 220 560 – 620 770 – 850 Porgera (47.5%)1 436 791 1,018 230 – 260 700 – 750 990 – 1,080 Kalgoorlie (50%) 320 752 886 350 – 365 610 – 630 670 – 700 Acacia (63.9%) 468 772 1,112 480 – 500 670 – 700 950 – 980 Hemlo 219 708 895 200 – 220 600 – 660 790 – 870 Golden Sunlight 68 1,098 1,379 30 – 45 920 – 990 1,000 – 1,050

Total Continuing Operations 5,514 $ 566 $ 761 5,000 – 5,500 $ 540 – $ 580 $ 725 – $ 775

Cowal 156 560 621 – – – Round Mountain (50%) 192 710 910 – – – Bald Mountain 191 628 1,132 – – – Ruby Hill 10 628 696 – – – Pierina 54 880 1,411 – – –

Total Divested/Closed Sites 603 $ 658 $ 948 – – –

Total Gold2 6,117 $ 575 $ 780 5,000 – 5,500 $ 540 – $ 580 $ 725 – $ 775

Total Consolidated Barrick 6,117 $ 596 $ 831 5,000 – 5,5003 $ 550 – $ 590 $ 775 – $ 825

2015 2016 2016 2016 2015 2015 all-in forecast forecast forecast production C1 cash sustaining production C1 cash all-in sustaining (millions lbs) costs ($/lb) costs ($/lb) (millions lbs) costs ($/lb) costs ($/lb)

Copper Zaldívar4 218 $ 1.74 $ 2.11 100 – 120 $ 1.70 – $ 1.90 $ 2.20 – $ 2.40 Lumwana 287 1.72 2.42 270 – 290 $ 1.35 – $ 1.60 $ 1.90 – $ 2.20 Jabal Sayid 6 – – – – –

Total Copper 511 $ 1.73 $ 2.33 370 – 410 $ 1.45 – $ 1.75 $ 2.05 – $ 2.35

1. Porgera presented on a 95% basis until August 31, 2015 and a 47.5% basis thereafter.2. Total gold cash costs and all-in sustaining costs per ounce exclude the impact of hedges and/or costs allocated to non-operating sites. 3. Operating unit guidance ranges reflect expectations at each individual operating unit, but do not add up to corporate-wide guidance range total.4. Zaldívar presented on a 100% basis until November 30, 2015 and a 50% basis thereafter. Results from December 1, 2015 onwards are accounted for under the

equity method.



Operating OutlookWe expect 2016 gold production to be in the range of 5.0 to 5.5 million ounces. The first half of the year is expected to average higher than the second half for all-in sustaining costs, with the second quarter of the year expected to be the weakest. Production will be lower than 2015 as a result of the following operating mines:n The sale of Round Mountain and Bald Mountain in

first quarter 2016, and of Cowal, Ruby Hill, and 50% of our interest in Porgera in 2015 (2015 aggregate production of 985 thousand ounces).

n Lower production at Lagunas Norte (2015 production: 560 thousand ounces), as a result of the progressive depletion of oxide ores, which are being replaced with sulfide ore with lower kinetics and recoveries in 2016.

These production decreases are expected to be partially offset by an increase in production at Pueblo Viejo, Veladero, Kalgoorlie and Acacia as a result of the following:n Higher production at Pueblo Viejo (2015 production,

Barrick share: 572 thousand ounces) due to an increase in expected throughput and plant availability as compared to 2015, primarily due to overcoming the issues related to the Oxygen Plant motor failures which negatively impacted 2015 throughput, combined with improved efficiency in 2016 through ore blending optimization, increased autoclave availability, and optimization of maintenance strategies.

n Higher production at Veladero (2015 production: 602 thousand ounces) primarily due to an increase in expected ore grades in 2016 from Federico phase 3 and 4 combined with an expected improvement in equipment availability.

n Higher production at Kalgoorlie (2015 production, Barrick share: 320 thousand ounces) due to an increase in total ore tons processed and higher expected head grade in 2016.

n Higher production at Acacia (2015 production, Barrick’s share: 468 thousand ounces) primarily due to an expected 5% increase in production at North Mara as a result of an increased proportion of mill feed being sourced from the Gokona underground and a forecasted 10% increase in production at Buzwagi due to improved access to the main ore zone from second quarter.

Consolidated Expense and Capital GuidanceOur 2015 consolidated expenses and capital expenditures and forecast consolidated expenses and capital expenditures for 2016 are as follows:

($ millions, except per ounce/pound data) 2015 Actual 2016 Guidance

Depreciation: Gold ($ per ounce) 265 240 – 260 Copper ($ per pound) 0.20 0.20 – 0.30 Exploration and project expenses 355 225 –275 Exploration and evaluation 163 125 – 155 Project expenses 192 100 – 120 General and administrative: Corporate administration 181 ~145 Stock based compensation1 10 ~45 Acacia2 42 ~25 Total general and administrative 233 ~215 Other expense/(income) (113) 20 – 40 Finance costs3 739 690 – 730 Capital expenditures: Minesite sustaining 1,331 1,200 – 1,400 Minesite expansion4 120 100 – 150 Projects5 61 50 – 100 Total capital expenditures 1,512 1,350 – 1,650

1. 2015 actual includes restricted share units related to corporate while 2016 guidance figure includes global restricted share units.

2. 2015 actual includes $6 million of restricted share unit costs, which are not forecasted as part of the 2016 guidance figure.

3. 2015 actual includes a net gain on debt extinguishment of $68 million. Gross finance costs were $807 million.

4. 2015 actual excludes $17 million of capitalized interest.5. 2015 actual excludes $81 million reversal of accruals for contract claims and

other project costs at Pascua-Lama.

2016 Guidance AnalysisHighlightsn Forecasted gold production to be in the range of

5.0 to 5.5 million ounces. n All-in sustaining costs forecasted to be in the range

of $775 to $825 per ounce. n Forecasted capital spending to be in the range of

$1.35 to $1.65 billion.n Targeting to be free cash flow positive at our 2016

budget assumption of $1,000 per ounce.

Estimates of future production, cost of sales, cash costs and all-in sustaining costs presented in this MD&A are based on mine plans that reflect the expected method by which we will mine reserves at each site. Actual gold and copper production and associated costs may vary from these estimates due to a number of operational and non-operational risk factors (see the “Cautionary Statement on Forward-Looking Information” on page 18 of this MD&A for a description of certain risk factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from these estimates).



DepreciationDepreciation applicable to gold is expected to be in the range of $240 to $260 per ounce, which reflects a decrease from $265 per ounce in 2015. The decrease in 2016 is primarily due to a decrease in depreciation at Pueblo Viejo, Lagunas Norte and Golden Sunlight, as a result of an expected increase in production over their life of mine. This was partially offset by an expected increase in depreciation at Cortez due to the planned drawdown of work in process and stockpile inventory combined with a higher proportion of mining expected from the open pit in 2016, which carries a higher depreciation rate, at Goldstrike due to a full year of depreciation relating to the thiosulfate circuit, and at Veladero.

Exploration and Evaluation ExpensesWe expect to incur approximately $125 to $155 million of exploration and evaluation (“E&E”) expenditures in 2016. This reflects a prudent level of spend over last year’s expenditure and aligns with Barrick’s strategic objective to be free cash flow positive in light of the gold price environment. We continue to take advantage of existing infrastructure and advance key growth projects such as Goldrush, Cortez Hills Lower Zone and Alturas. These expenditures will provide a near-term return on investment by adding to and/or upgrading our reserve and resource base, and in some cases may positively impact production and mine life.

About 85% of the budget is allocated to our two core regions (Nevada and the Andean region in South America), of which 36% is allocated to Cortez and Goldrush and 24% predominantly towards Chile.

Project ExpensesWe expect to incur approximately $100 to $120 million of project expenses in 2016. Project expenses primarily relate to expenses at Pascua-Lama for water management and monitoring activities as part of the temporary suspension plan, and other project expenditures associated with Cerro Casale, Donlin Gold and Reko Diq.

General and Administrative ExpensesIn 2015, we exceeded our overhead cost reduction target of $50 million for the year, and expect to reach $100 million in annualized overhead savings in 2016. We realized approximately $65 million in reductions in gross

Cash costs are expected to be in the range of $550 to $590 per ounce, which is lower than $596 per ounce in 2015 as a result of the following: n Lower consolidated cash costs in 2016 resulting from

the sale of Round Mountain and Bald Mountain in first quarter 2016, and 50% of our interest in Porgera, and Ruby Hill in 2015, each of which carried a higher average cost in 2015.

n Lower costs at Pueblo Viejo primarily due to the positive impact of increased production on unit production costs and higher silver by-product credits as a result of higher expected silver recoveries in 2016.

n Lower cash costs at Acacia primarily due to higher expected production which will contribute to lower unit production costs, combined with a focus on ongoing cost reduction measures in 2016.

n Lower cash costs due to the impact of lower expected hedge losses from our currency and fuel hedging programs in 2016. In 2015, we realized about $21 per ounce in realized hedge losses from our currency and fuel hedging programs.

These cash cost decreases are expected to be partially offset by an increase in cash costs at Lagunas Norte as a result of a decrease in expected production and sales volumes, which negatively impacts unit production costs, and higher cash costs at Goldstrike primarily due to processing a full year of autoclave tonnes which are processed at a higher cost per tonne compared to the roaster. The modified autoclaves did not enter commercial production until third quarter 2015 due to the commissioning of the thiosulfate circuit.

All-in sustaining costs are expected to be in the range of $775 to $825 per ounce for gold, which reflects a decrease from $831 per ounce in 2015, primarily due to lower expected cash costs from $596 per ounce to our expected range of $550 to $590 per ounce, combined with lower minesite development capital expenditures due to a decrease in capitalized stripping activities at Veladero and Kalgoorlie and lower development capital expenditures resulting from the sale of Round Mountain and Bald Mountain in first quarter 2016, and Cowal, Ruby Hill, and 50% of our interest in Porgera in 2015.



Ruby Hill and 50% of Zaldívar in 2015. Lower development capital expenditures are expected to be partially offset by an increase in minesite sustaining capital expenditures at Goldstrike, Cortez, Pueblo Viejo and Pierina.

At Goldstrike, sustaining capital expenditures are expected to increase primarily due to planned tailings expansions scheduled in 2016, the addition of dewatering wells associated with the underground water management plan and a shift in timing of underground equipment replacements from fourth quarter 2015 to 2016. At Cortez, sustaining capital is expected to be higher in 2016 primarily due to planned hydrology, dewatering and other water management projects scheduled to occur in 2016 combined with a shift in timing of haul truck capitalized maintenance originally planned for fourth quarter 2015 that will not be required until 2016. At Pueblo Viejo, sustaining capital is expected to increase primarily due to a shift in timing of project expenditures from 2015 to 2016 combined with acceleration of the tailings extension into 2016. At Pierina, sustaining capital is expected to increase in 2016 primarily due to completion of the phase 7 leach pad expansion in 2016 which commenced in fourth quarter 2015. The phase 7 leach pad expansion is scheduled to be completed in third quarter 2016 and is expected to produce approximately 200 thousand ounces over the next three years.

Minesite development capital expenditures are expected to be lower in 2016 due to a decrease in production phase stripping activities at Veladero and Kalgoorlie and lower development capital expenditures resulting from the sale of Round Mountain and Bald Mountain in first quarter 2016, and 50% of our interest in Porgera, Cowal, Ruby Hill and 50% of Zaldívar in 2015.

At Veladero, development capital expenditures are expected to decrease due to a reduction in capitalized stripping in the Federico phase 4 pit as compared to 2015. At Kalgoorlie, the decrease in development capital expenditures is primarily due to lower capitalized stripping in the open pit in line with the mine plan.

functional general and administrative and overhead costs compared to the prior year, allowing us to meet our corporate administration expense target of $145 million in 2015, after adjusting for severance and other one-time costs. Corporate administration costs in 2016 are expected to be about $145 million.

Finance CostsFinance costs primarily represent interest expense on long-term debt. We expect finance costs in 2016 to be lower than 2015 levels primarily due to lower interest expense in 2016 following $3.1 billion of debt repayments in 2015, partially offset by a decrease in capitalized interest in 2016 due to the cessation of interest capitalization upon completion of the thiosulfate circuit at Goldstrike. In 2015, finance costs included the recognition of a $68 million net gain on extinguishment arising from the debt repurchases that occurred in fourth quarter 2015. We do not expect to capitalize significant interest costs in 2016.

Capital ExpendituresTotal capital expenditures for 2016 are expected to be in the range of $1.35 to $1.65 billion, compared to $1.51 billion in 2015, which reflects a decrease in minesite development capital expenditures, partially offset by an increase in other minesite sustaining capital expenditures.

Minesite sustaining capital expenditures reflect the capital spending required to support current planned production levels and those which do not meet our definition of non-sustaining capital. This includes capitalized production phase stripping costs at our open pit mines, underground mine development and E&E expenditures that meet our criteria for capitalization.

Minesite sustaining capital expenditures are expected to decrease slightly from 2015 expenditure levels of $1,331 million to a range of about $1,200 to $1,400 million mainly due to a decrease in minesite development capital expenditures at Veladero and Kalgoorlie in 2016 and lower development capital expenditures resulting from the sale of Round Mountain, Bald Mountain, 50% of our interest in Porgera, Cowal,



production levels. In 2016, we expect our share of project capital costs to be in the range of $50 to $100 million, which reflects ongoing pre-stripping activities at South Arturo due to the acceleration of planned mining into 2016 and capitalized costs related to permitting, engineering and construction activities related to the temporary solution for water management at Pascua-Lama.

Effective Income Tax Rate At a gold price of $1,000 per ounce in 2016, our expected effective tax rate is 74% on all income excluding expenses from non-operating entities, which do not have a present source of gold production or taxable income. These expenses cannot be recognized as a deferred tax asset, and therefore there is no tax recovery recorded on these expenses. The effect of these expenses in our income statement, with no corresponding tax effect, is to increase our effective rate on total net income to 133%. In the event that there will be sources of taxable income in the future, we may recognize some or all of these deferred tax assets.

Minesite expansion capital expenditures include non-sustaining capital expenditures at new projects and existing operations that are related to discrete projects that significantly increase the net present value of the mine and are not related to current production activity. Expansion capital expenditures are expected to be in the range of $100 to $150 million in 2016, in line with 2015 expenditure levels of $120 million, which mainly reflects an increase in expansion capital expenditures at Cortez, offset by a decrease at Goldstrike in 2016. Cortez expansion capital expenditures are expected to be higher in 2016 due to an increase in feasibility and development expenditures related to Lower Zone expansion projects combined with an increase in pre-stripping activities at Crossroads compared to 2015.

Expansion capital expenditures at Goldstrike are expected to be lower in 2016 following completion of the thiosulfate circuit at the autoclave which was commissioned in 2015.

Project capital expenditures reflect capital expenditures related to the initial construction of the project and include all of the expenditures required to bring the project into operation and achieve commercial

Outlook Assumptions and Economic Sensitivity Analysis 2016 Guidance Hypothetical Impact on EBITDA1

assumption change AISC (millions)

Gold revenue, net of royalties $ 1,000/oz +/-$ 100/oz n/a $ 536Copper revenue, net of royalties $ 2.00/lb +/-$ 0.50/lb n/a $ 178

Gold all-in sustaining costs Gold royalties & production taxes $ 1,000/oz $ 100/oz $ (3)/oz $ 16 WTI crude oil price2,3 $ 50/bbl $ 10/bbl $ (1)/oz $ 8 Australian dollar exchange rate2 0.72 : 1 +10% $ 4/oz $ (21) Australian dollar exchange rate2 0.72 : 1 -10% $ (4)/oz $ 21 Canadian dollar exchange rate 1.40 : 1 +10% $ (6)/oz $ 28 Canadian dollar exchange rate 1.40 : 1 -10% $ 7/oz $ (34)

Copper all-in sustaining costs WTI crude oil price2,3 $ 50/bbl $ 10/bbl $ (0.01)/lb $ 4 Chilean peso exchange rate 715 : 1 +10% $ (0.02)/lb $ 8 Chilean peso exchange rate 715 : 1 -10% $ 0.03/lb $ (9)

1. EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial performance measure with no standardized definition under IFRS. For further information and a detailed reconciliation, please see page 84 of this MD&A.

2. Due to our hedging activities, which are reflected in these sensitivities, we are partially protected against changes in these factors.3. Impact on EBITDA only reflects contracts that mature in 2016.



that may prevent the Company from achieving its objectives. It also fosters a culture of transparent, real-time risk management as a collective and enables a learning organization.

Principal RisksThe following subsections describe some of our key sources of uncertainty and relevant risk modification activities. The risks described below are not the only ones facing Barrick. Our business is subject to inherent risks in financial, regulatory, strategic and operational areas. For a more fulsome discussion of those inherent risks, see “Risk Factors” in our most recent Form 40-F/Annual Information Form on file with the SEC and Canadian provincial securities regulatory authorities. Also see the “Cautionary Statement on Forward-Looking Information” on page 18.

Financial Position and LiquidityOur liquidity profile, level of indebtedness and credit ratings are all factors in our ability to meet short- and long-term financial demands. Barrick’s outstanding debt balances impact liquidity due to interest payments and elevated leverage ratios, which could impact our investment grade credit rating and ability to access capital markets. In addition, Barrick’s ability to draw on its credit facility is subject to meeting its covenants. Our primary source of liquidity is our operating cash flow, which is dependent on the ability of our operations to deliver projected future cash flows. The ability of our operations to deliver projected future cash flows within the context of a reduced production profile, as well as future changes in gold and copper market prices, either favorable or unfavorable, will continue to have a material impact on our cash flow and liquidity.

Risk Modification Approach:

n Continued focus on generating positive free cash flow by improving the underlying cost structures of our operations in a sustainable manner;

n Lengthened tenor of the average maturity of our outstanding debt through liability management activities;

n Preparation of budgets and forecasts to understand the impact of different price scenarios on liquidity, and formulate appropriate strategies;

n Disciplined capital allocation criteria for all investments;n Proactive cash flow management to ensure funds are

available to meet financial obligations;

Risks and Risk ManagementOverview The ability to deliver on our vision, strategic objectives and operating guidance depends on our ability to understand and appropriately respond to the uncertainties or “risks” we face that may prevent us from achieving our objectives. In order to achieve this we:n Maintain a framework that ensures we manage

risk effectively and in a manner that creates the greatest value;

n Integrate a process for managing risk into all our important decision-making processes so that we reduce the effect of uncertainty on achieving our objectives;

n Ensure that the key controls we rely on to achieve the company’s objectives are actively monitored so that they remain in place and are effective at all times; and

n Provide assurance to the Executives and relevant Committees of the Board of Directors on the effectiveness of key control activities.

Board and Committee OversightWe maintain strong risk oversight practices, with responsibilities outlined in the Board’s and related committees’ mandates. The Board’s mandate makes clear the responsibility for reviewing and discussing with management the processes used to assess and manage risk, including the identification by management of the principal risks of the business, and the implementation of appropriate systems to deal with such risks.

The Risk Committee of the Board of Directors assists the Board in overseeing the Company’s management of principal risks as well as the implementation of policies and standards for monitoring and modifying such risks, and monitoring and reviewing the Company’s financial position and financial risk management programs generally. The Audit Committee and Corporate Social Responsibility Committee also provide oversight focusing on financial and operational (e.g. Safety & Health, Environmental, Community, Security, etc.) risk exposures, respectively.

Management OversightOn a weekly basis, the global leadership team, including the executive team, representatives from each of Barrick’s country offices, minesites and corporate functions, participate in a Business Plan Review (“BPR”) meeting. This forum allows for the timely identification of key risks



n Benchmarking the performance of each mine to other Barrick mines and to other external companies;

n Educating staff on the linkage between key operating metrics and value creation;

n Identifying gaps and design changes to management processes such as planning, compensation and reporting to align goals with improving the measurement scorecard;

n Identifying a standardized way of setting targets to become Best in Class in the mining industry; and

n Developing a roadmap to achieve targets at each mine including the evaluation of several Value Realization initiatives.

Social License to Operate At Barrick, we are committed to building, operating, and closing our mines in a safe and responsible manner. To do this, we develop long-term and mutually-beneficial relationships with host governments and communities while working to minimize the social and environmental impacts of our activities. Recent environmental incidents in the extractive industry emphasize the hazards (e.g. water management, tailings storage facilities, etc.) and the potential consequences to both the environment and community health and safety. As a result, our industry is likely to face both additional public and regulatory scrutiny.


n Our external Corporate Social Responsibility Advisory Board was formed in 2012 and advises the Company on a range of corporate responsibility matters, including community relations, sustainable development, water, energy, climate change, security and human rights;

n Barrick’s community relations, environment, safety and health, and security management systems set expectations, define performance standards and provide the necessary tools to modify the related risks;

n We take a partnership approach with all our stakeholders, including with our home and host governments. This means we work to balance our own interests and priorities with those of our government partners, working to ensure that everyone derives real value from our operations;

n Recent introduction of the Dividend Reinvestment Plan (the “DRIP”);

n Discretion on the declaration and payment of dividends;n Replaced the financial covenant tied to our credit

facility that required Barrick to maintain a minimum consolidated tangible net worth with a new financial covenant that requires us to maintain a net debt to total capitalization ratio of less than 0.60, which better reflects our deleveraging measures and future expected debt reduction;

nOther options include: n Draw on our $4.0 billion undrawn credit facility; n Further non-core asset sales, joint venture or

partnership opportunities; n Issuance of debt or equity securities in the public

markets or to private investors.

Improving Free Cash Flow and AISCOur ability to improve productivity, drive down operating costs and reduce working capital is a focus in 2016 and subject to several sources of uncertainty. These range from our ability to successfully complete the ramp up of the thiosulfate circuit at Goldstrike to our ability to execute key business improvement programs aimed at improving productivity and cost in a sustainable manner.


n Formal project management protocols are established around these business transformation programs. The status of these projects is reviewed on a weekly basis during the BPR meetings to ensure the timely identification of key risk exposures that may affect their successful delivery;

n Implementing a program aimed at simplifying and integrating business processes across the organization with a focus on improving visibility to key performance drivers, delivering insight and underpinning informed decision making;

n Implementing a Best in Class program encompassing: n Forming a Business Improvement group to ensure

the rapid implementation and management of the Best in Class program;

n Developing a standardized, performance-oriented, measurement scorecard linking top operational and economic measures;



The price of gold is subject to volatile price movements over short periods of time and is affected by numerous industry and macroeconomic factors. During the year, the gold price ranged from $1,046 per ounce to $1,308 per ounce. The average market price for the year of $1,160 per ounce represented a decrease of 8% versus 2014.

700

800

900

1,000

1,100

1,200

1,300

1,750

2,000

50

55

65

70

60

75

80

85

90

USD$/oz

AVERAGE MONTHLY SPOT GOLD PRICES

2009 2010 2011

20122011 2013 2014 2015

500

750

1,000

1,250

1,500

1,750

2,000

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

Average Spot Price

USD Index

AVERAGE MONTHLY SPOT GOLD PRICES

AVERAGE MONTHLY SPOT GOLD PRICES (dollars per ounce)

The decline in the price of gold in 2015 primarily occurred as a result of a strengthening US dollar over the course of the year. US dollar strength was largely due to increasing economic strength in the United States versus concerns over economic performance in Europe and China, leading to a divergence in monetary policies, as the United States entered a rate hike cycle amidst an ongoing easing cycle in Europe and China. Investor sentiment regarding gold remained muted, particularly in the Western world, as was evidenced by decreased holdings in global Exchange Traded Funds (“ETFs”) of 4 million ounces, versus a decrease in holdings of 5 million ounces in 2014 and 29 million ounces in 2013. However, physical demand for jewelry and other uses, particularly in China and India, remained strong and continued to be a significant driver of the overall gold market.

n As part of this approach, we work closely with governments, international NGOs and advocacy organizations to develop appropriate standards and guidelines for our industry.

Resources and Reserves, Growth and Production OutlookLike any mining company, we face the risk that we are unable to discover or acquire new resources or that we do not convert resources into production. As we move into 2016 and beyond, our overriding objective of growing free cash flow per share is underpinned by a strong pipeline of organic projects and minesite expansion opportunities in our core regions. Uncertainty related to these opportunities exists (potentially both favorable and unfavorable) due to the speculative nature of mineral exploration and development as well as the potential for increased costs, delays, suspensions and technical challenges associated with the construction of capital projects.


n Exploration activities including minesite exploration and global programs;

n Strategic business development activities;n Enhance project design to stagger capital outlay and

optimize timing of cash flows;n Identify opportunities to improve project economics;n Leverage existing or develop new business

partnerships with those who share a mutual interest in achieving the Company and project objectives;

n Defer, cancel, or sell projects that cannot achieve desired capital allocation targets.

Market Overview Gold The market prices of gold, and, to a lesser extent, copper are the primary drivers of our profitability and our ability to generate free cash flow for our shareholders.



Silver prices do not significantly impact our current operating earnings, cash flows or gold cash costs. Silver prices, however, will have a significant impact on the overall economics for our Pascua-Lama project.

425

475

525

625

675

AVERAGE MONTHLY SPOT SILVER PRICES (dollars per ounces)

2009 2010 2011

575

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

AVERAGE MONTHLY SPOT SILVER PRICES (dollars per ounce)

20122011 2013 2014 2015

Currency Exchange RatesThe results of our mining operations outside of the United States are affected by US dollar exchange rates with non-US denominated currencies comprising approximately 25% of our operating and capital cost exposures. Although we have made dispositions, we continue to have exposure to the Australian and Canadian dollars through a combination of mine operating and corporate administration costs, as well as exposure to the Chilean peso through expected future capital and operating costs at our Pascua-Lama project and mine operating costs at Zaldívar. We also have exposure to the Argentinean peso through operating costs at our Veladero mine, peso denominated VAT receivable balances and expected future capital and operating costs at our Pascua-Lama project. In addition, we have exposure to the Papua New Guinea kina, Peruvian sol, Zambian kwacha, Tanzanian shilling and Dominican peso through mine operating and capital costs.

CopperDuring 2015, London Metal Exchange (“LME”) copper prices traded in a range of $2.02 to $2.94 per pound, averaged $2.49 per pound, and closed the year at $2.09 per pound. Copper prices are significantly influenced by physical demand from emerging markets, especially China.

The decline in the copper price over the course of the year was largely due to disappointing economic results out of China, which is by far the largest single market for copper demand, an overall decline in commodity prices, and a declining cost structure as a result of lower oil prices and US dollar strength.

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

20082007 2009 2010 2011

20122011 2013 2014 2015

500

750

1,000

1,250

1,500

1,750

2,000

AVERAGE MONTHLY SPOT COPPER PRICES (dollars per pound)

AVERAGE MONTHLY SPOT COPPER PRICES (dollars per pound)

We have provisionally priced copper sales for which final price determination versus the relevant copper index is outstanding at the balance sheet date. As at December 31, 2015, we recorded 55 million pounds of copper sales subject to final settlement at an average provisional price of $2.10 per pound. The impact to net income before taxation of a 10% movement in the market price of copper would be approximately $11 million, holding all other variables constant.

SilverSilver traded in a range of $13.65 to $18.49 per ounce in 2015, averaged $15.68 per ounce and closed the year at $13.82 per ounce. The silver price is driven by factors similar to those influencing investment demand for gold.



AVERAGE MONTHLY AUD SPOT AND HEDGE RATES

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

0.9

1.0

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

0.9

1.0

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

1.1

1.2

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

1.1

1.2

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

1.10

Average Spot Rate Average Hedge Rate


AVERAGE MONTHLY CAD SPOT AND HEDGE RATES

0.90

1.00

1.10

1.20

1.30

1.40

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

AVERAGE MONTHLY AUD SPOT AND HEDGE RATES

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

0.9

1.0

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

0.9

1.0

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

1.1

1.2

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

1.1

1.2

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

1.10



AVERAGE MONTHLY CAD SPOT AND HEDGE RATES

0.90

1.00

1.10

1.20

1.30

1.40

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

AVERAGE MONTHLY CLP SPOT AND HEDGE RATES

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015


450

500

550

600

650

700

750

450

500

550

600

650

700

750

450

550

500

600

700

750

650

Fluctuations in the US dollar increase the volatility of our costs reported in US dollars, subject to positions that we have put in place through our currency hedging program. In 2015, the Australian dollar traded in a range of $0.69 to $0.83 against the US dollar, while the US dollar against the Canadian dollar and Chilean peso ranged from $1.16 to $1.40 and CLP593 to CLP718, respectively.

Due to expectations of a strengthened US dollar, in recent years we have reduced our overall foreign currency derivative positions, whether by closing out positions before maturity or limiting the addition of new positions. As a result, our foreign currency derivative contracts in place beyond 2015 currently consist only of AUD $85 million of contracts maturing in 2016.

During the year, we recorded losses in earnings of approximately $87 million from our Australian dollar, Canadian dollar and Chilean peso hedges, primarily impacting our operating and corporate administration costs (2014: $97 million gain; 2013: $279 million gain).

Assuming December 31, 2015 market exchange rate curves and year-end spot prices, we expect to realize Australian dollar currency hedge losses of approximately $35 million against operating, administrative and capital costs in 2016. Despite potential future losses on currency derivative positions, a strengthening US dollar versus our key currency exposures is beneficial to our cost structure in 2016 as we are less than fully hedged against such exposures. As at December 31, 2015, we no longer have any Canadian dollar or Chilean peso currency hedges outstanding.

AUD Currency Contracts

% of % of total expected Effective expected operating Crystallized Contracts average AUD cost gain/(loss) in (AUD hedge rate exposure1 exposure OCI2 (USD millions) (AUDUSD) hedged hedged millions)

2016 85 0.91 20% 23% (14)

1. Includes all forecasted operating, administrative, sustainable and eligible project capital expenditures.

2. To be reclassified from Other Comprehensive Income (“OCI”) to earnings when indicated.



Financial Fuel Hedge Summary

Impact of $10 % of change on pre- Barrels Average expected tax earnings (thousands) price exposure (USD millions)1

2016 2,933 85 70% 13 2017 2,093 81 55% 17 2018 1,080 79 33% 22

1. Includes the impact of hedges currently in place.

US Dollar Interest Rates Beginning in 2008, in response to the contraction of global credit markets and in an effort to spur economic activity and avoid potential deflation, the US Federal Reserve reduced the range for its benchmark rate to between 0% and 0.25%. The benchmark was kept at this level until December 2015, when the range was increased by 25 basis points. As economic conditions in the US continue to normalize, we expect incremental increases to short-term rates to continue in 2016.

At present, our interest rate exposure mainly relates to interest receipts on our cash balances ($2.5 billion at December 31, 2015); the mark-to-market value of derivative instruments; the fair value of and ongoing payments under US dollar interest-rate swaps; the carrying value of certain long lived assets and liabilities; and to the interest payments on our variable-rate debt ($0.6 billion at December 31, 2015). Currently, the amount of interest expense recorded in our consolidated statement of income is not materially impacted by changes in interest rates, because the majority of debt was issued at fixed interest rates. The relative amounts of variable-rate financial assets and liabilities may change in the future, depending on the amount of operating cash flow we generate, as well as the level of capital expenditures and our ability to borrow on favorable terms using fixed rate debt instruments.

FuelFor 2015, the price of West Texas Intermediate (“WTI”) crude oil traded in a wide range between $34 and $63 per barrel, averaged $49 per barrel and closed the year at $37 per barrel. During 2015, the price of crude oil decreased significantly as a result of concerns over global economic growth, limiting expectations for demand, at the same time that global oil supply has been increasing due in part to advances in extraction technology.

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120

CRUDE OIL MARKET PRICE (WTI) (dollars per barrel)

20

40

60

80

100

120

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

In 2015, we recorded hedge losses in earnings of $19 million on our fuel hedge positions (2014: $4 million loss and 2013: $9 million gain). Assuming December 31, 2015 market forward curves and year-end spot prices, we expect to realize fuel hedge losses of approximately $110 million against operating, administrative and capital costs in 2016. A significant portion of these losses have already been recorded in the consolidated statements of income as an unrealized loss on non-hedge derivatives. Beginning in January 2015, upon early adoption of IFRS 9, Barrick’s fuel hedges qualified for hedge accounting and unrealized gains and losses will be recorded in Other Comprehensive Income.



Revenue($ millions, except per ounce/pound data in dollars) For the years ended December 31 2015 2014 2013

Gold 000s oz sold1 6,083 6,284 7,174 Revenue $ 7,813 $ 8,744 $ 10,670 Market price2 1,160 1,266 1,411 Realized price2,3 $ 1,157 $ 1,265 $ 1,407 Copper millions lbs sold1 510 435 519 Revenue $ 1,002 $ 1,224 $ 1,651 Market price2 2.49 3.11 3.32 Realized price2,3 2.37 3.03 3.39 Other sales $ 214 $ 271 $ 299

1. Includes our equity share of gold ounces from Acacia and Pueblo Viejo and copper pounds from Zaldívar.

2. Per ounce/pound weighted average.3. Realized price is a non-GAAP financial performance measure with no standard

meaning under IFRS. For further information and a detailed reconciliation, please see page 84 of this MD&A.

In 2015, gold revenues were down 11% compared to the prior year primarily due to a lower realized gold price combined with a decrease in gold sales volume. Copper revenues for 2015 were down 18% compared to the prior year primarily due a lower realized copper price and $67 million in negative provisional pricing adjustments, partially offset by an increase in sales volume.

Realized gold prices for 2015 were down $108 per ounce compared to the prior year. The decrease in realized gold prices reflects the lower market gold prices in 2015, down 8% compared to 2014. In 2015, the realized copper price was down $0.66 per pound compared to 2014, due to the 20% decline in market copper prices over the prior year and the negative provisional pricing adjustments recognized in 2015.

In 2015, gold production was 2% lower than the prior year primarily due to a decrease in production at Pueblo Viejo, Lagunas Norte, and Veladero combined with the impact of the asset sales that occurred in the second half of 2015. The divested sites contributed an additional 135 thousand production ounces in 2014 compared to 2015. This was partially offset by an increase in production at Goldstrike, Cortez, and Turquoise Ridge.

Copper production for 2015 increased by 17% compared to the prior year due to higher production at Lumwana, partially offset by lower production at Zaldívar. Production at Lumwana was higher primarily as a result of the partial conveyor collapse that shut down the mill and concentrate production for much of second quarter 2014. The decreased production at Zaldívar reflects the divestment of 50% of our ownership in the mine that was completed on December 1, 2015.

Production Costs($ millions, except per ounce/pound data in dollars) For the years ended December 31 2015 2014 2013

Cost of sales Direct mining costs $4,738 $ 4,803 $ 5,205 Depreciation 1,771 1,648 1,732 Royalty expense 336 303 321 Community relations 62 76 71 Cost of sales – gold1 5,897 5,794 6,220 Cash costs2,3 596 598 566 All-in sustaining costs – gold2,3 831 864 915 Cost of sales – copper1 814 954 1,100 C1 cash costs2,3 1.73 1.92 1.92 All-in sustaining costs per pound2,3 $ 2.33 $ 2.79 $ 2.74

1. 2014 and 2013 figures restated to include community relations costs. 2. Per ounce/pound weighted average.3. Cash costs, all-in sustaining costs and C1 cash costs are non-GAAP financial

performance measures with no standard meaning under IFRS. For further information and a detailed reconciliation, please see pages 78 – 83 of this MD&A.

In 2015, cost of sales applicable to gold was 2% higher than the prior year due to an increase in depreciation expense, partially offset by lower direct mining and gold royalty costs resulting from decreased sales volumes.

Gold cash costs for 2015 were in line with the prior year as the benefit of lower direct mining costs and reduced royalty expense was offset by realized losses on our foreign currency and fuel hedge contracts, movements in inventory and the allocation of shared services to the operating sites in 2015 combined with the impact of lower sales volume on unit production costs. In 2015, all-in sustaining costs were down $33 per ounce compared to the prior year primarily due to a reduction in minesite sustaining capital expenditures, partially offset by the impact of lower sales volume on unit production costs.

Review of Annual Financial Results



In 2015, cost of sales applicable to copper decreased $140 million compared to the prior year primarily due to lower depreciation expense as a result of the impairment charges recorded in fourth quarter 2014 combined with the impact of ceasing depreciation of the Zaldívar assets in third quarter 2015 as a result of reclassifying the mine’s assets as held-for-sale. This was partially offset by higher royalty expense at Lumwana in first quarter 2015 resulting from the increase in the royalty rate from 6% to 20%, subsequently lowered to 9% in third quarter 2015.

C1 cash costs per pound for 2015 were 10% lower than the prior year reflecting the impact of higher sales volume on unit production costs. All-in sustaining costs per pound were 16% lower than the prior year primarily reflecting the effect of the above factors on C1 cash costs combined with a decrease in minesite sustaining capital expenditures at Lumwana and Zaldívar.

Capital Expenditures1

($ millions) For the years ended December 31 2015 2014 2013

Project capital expenditures2 $ 13 $ 234 $ 2,137 Minesite sustaining 632 764 1,150 Mine development 727 874 1,317 Minesite expansion2 120 362 468 Capitalized interest 17 30 303

Total consolidated capital expenditures $1,509 $ 2,264 $ 5,375

1. These amounts are presented on a 100% accrued basis.2. Project and expansion capital expenditures are included in our calculation of

all-in costs, but not included in our calculation of all-in sustaining costs.

In 2015, capital expenditures decreased 33% compared to the prior year. The decrease is primarily due to a decrease in minesite sustaining and development capital expenditures combined with lower minesite expansion and project capital expenditures. The decrease in minesite sustaining capital expenditures is primarily due to our disciplined capital allocation approach. This was partially offset by an increase in costs at Veladero relating to the phase 4B and 5A leach pad expansions combined with the capitalization of costs committed by the mine to improve leach pad facilities as a result of the cyanide

incident that occurred in third quarter 2015. The 17% reduction in minesite development capital expenditures in 2015 is due to lower capitalized stripping costs, primarily at Goldstrike and Cortez, partially offset by an increase in those costs at Porgera and Bald Mountain. Minesite expansion capital expenditures decreased 67% and capitalized interest decreased by $13 million compared to the prior year as a result of the completion of the thiosulfate circuit at Goldstrike, which entered commercial production in third quarter 2015.

Additional Significant Statement of Income Items($ millions) For the years ended December 31 2015 2014 2013

General & administrative expenses $ 233 $ 385 $ 390 Corporate administration1 $ 181 $ 212 $ 188 Operating segment administration2 $ – $ 124 $ 162 Stock-based compensation $ 10 $ 5 $ 4 Acacia $ 42 $ 44 $ 36 Other expense/(income) $ (113) $ (14) $ 56 Exploration, evaluation & project costs $ 355 $ 392 $ 680 Finance costs $ 739 $ 796 $ 657 Finance income $ 13 $ 11 $ 9 Impairments $3,897 $ 4,106 $ 12,687

1. For the year ended December 31, 2015, corporate administration costs include approximately $29 million of severance costs (2014: $24 million).

2. In 2015, operating segment administration costs have been allocated to our operating sites and are now included in cost of sales.

General and Administrative Expenses General and administrative expenses were $152 million lower than the prior year, primarily related to transferring functional services costs to minesites reflecting services they require to run their business. Also contributing to the decrease was a reduction of approximately $65 million in overhead costs, excluding severance, stock-based compensation and Acacia corporate administration costs, which was recorded within general and administrative and cost of sales, exceeding our $50 million reduction target for the year. For further information regarding the allocation of shared services costs, refer to page 49 of this MD&A.



Other Expense (Income)Other income for 2015 increased by $99 million compared to the prior year. The increase is primarily due to the realization of gains on the sale of our Cowal mine and 50% of our interest in the Porgera mine, which closed in third quarter 2015. These gains were partially offset by $30 million in office closure costs primarily related to the exiting of leases at our Toronto and Salt Lake City offices and $27 million in minesite severance and non-operational costs primarily related to the end of surface mining at our Golden Sunlight mine. For a further breakdown of other expense (income), refer to note 9 to the Financial Statements.

Exploration, Evaluation and Project CostsExploration, evaluation and project costs for 2015 decreased $37 million compared to the prior year. The decrease is primarily due to a $22 million decrease in global exploration costs combined with a $30 million decrease in project costs at Jabal Sayid. This was partially offset by a $26 million increase in corporate development costs relating to projects. For a further breakdown of exploration, evaluation and project costs, refer to note 8 to the Financial Statements.

Finance Costs In 2015, finance costs were $57 million lower than the prior year primarily due to the recognition of a $68 million net gain on extinguishment arising from the debt repurchases that occurred in fourth quarter 2015, partially offset by a decrease in capitalized interest due to the cessation of interest capitalization upon completion of the thiosulfate circuit at Goldstrike. Interest costs incurred were in line with the prior year. For a further breakdown of finance costs/income, refer to note 13 to the Financial Statements.

Impairment ChargesFor the years ended December 31 2015 2014 2013

Post-tax Post-tax Post-tax (our (our (our ($ millions) share) share) share)

Goodwill Goldstrike $ 730 $ – $ – Zaldívar 427 712 – Pueblo Viejo 412 – – Cortez 355 – – Lagunas Norte 247 – – Jabal Sayid – 316 – Lumwana – 214 – Bald Mountain – 131 – Round Mountain – 36 – Australia Pacific – – 1,200 Copper – – 1,033 Capital projects – – 397 Acacia – – 185

Total goodwill impairment charges $2,171 $ 1,409 $ 2,815

Asset impairments Pascua-Lama $ 399 $ 382 $ 6,007 Pueblo Viejo 386 – – Buzwagi 30 – 439 Round Mountain/Bald Mountain 53 – 51 Lagunas Norte 26 – – Cerro Casale – 778 – Lumwana – 720 – Jabal Sayid – 198 704 Porgera – (160) 595 Cortez – 29 – Veladero – – 300 North Mara – – 125 Pierina – – 98 Kalgoorlie – 9 – Exploration sites – 7 94 Granny Smith – – 73 Marigold – – 39 Ruby Hill – – 33 Kanowna – – 41 Plutonic – – 26 Darlot – – 25 AFS investments – 18 23 Other 53 4 57

Total asset impairment charges $ 947 $ 1,985 $ 8,730

Tax effects and NCI 779 712 1,142

Total impairment charges (100%) $3,897 $ 4,106 $ 12,687



In 2015, primarily as a result of a decrease in the metal price assumptions used for our annual impairment test, we recognized goodwill impairment losses of $2.2 billion (net of non-controlling interests) and $947 million (net of tax and non-controlling interests) of impairment losses for non-current assets compared to goodwill and non-current asset impairment losses of $1.4 billion and $2 billion (net of tax and non-controlling interests), respectively, in the prior year. Refer to note 20 to the consolidated financial statements for a full description of impairment charges, including pre-tax amounts and sensitivity analysis.

Income Tax Expense

Reconciliation to Canadian Statutory Rate

($ millions) For the years ended December 31 2015 2014

At 26.5% statutory rate $(833) $ (703) Increase (decrease) due to: Allowances and special tax deductions1 (103) (93) Impact of foreign tax rates2 (110) 18 Expenses not tax deductible 55 96 Goodwill impairment charges not tax deductible 736 373 Impairment charges not recognized in deferred tax assets 246 334 Net currency translation losses on deferred tax balances 62 46 Current year tax losses not recognized in deferred tax assets 56 20 Internal restructures (116) (112) De-recognition of a deferred tax asset 20 – Non-recognition of US AMT credits 19 43 Adjustments in respect of prior years 44 (8) Increase to income tax related contingent liabilities 13 – Impact of tax rate changes – 20 Other withholding taxes 12 40 Mining taxes (125) 227 Other items (7) 5

Income tax expense (recovery) $ (31) $ 306

1. We are able to claim certain allowances and tax deductions unique to extractive industries that result in a lower effective tax rate.

2. We operate in multiple foreign tax jurisdictions that have tax rates different than the Canadian statutory rate.

The more significant items impacting income tax expense in 2015 and 2014 include the following:

Currency Translation Deferred tax balances are subject to remeasurement for changes in currency exchange rates each period. The most significant balances are Argentinean deferred tax liabilities. In 2015 and 2014, tax expense of $62 million and $46 million, respectively, primarily arose from translation losses due to the weakening of the Argentinean peso against the US dollar. These losses are included within deferred tax recovery/expense.

Internal RestructuresIn fourth quarter 2015, a deferred tax recovery of $116 million arose from a loss that was realized on internal restructuring of subsidiary corporations. This resulted in a net increase in deferred tax assets.

In second quarter 2014, a deferred tax recovery of $112 million arose from a restructure of internal debt to equity in subsidiary corporations, which resulted in the release of a deferred tax liability and a net increase in deferred tax assets.

De-recognition of a Deferred Tax AssetIn second quarter 2015, we recorded a deferred tax expense of $20 million related to de-recognition of a deferred tax asset in Pueblo Viejo.

Non-Recognition of US Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) CreditsIn fourth quarter 2015 and 2014, we recorded a deferred tax expense of $19 million and $43 million, respectively, related to US AMT credits which are not probable to be realized based on our current life of mine plans.

Tax Rate ChangesIn third quarter 2014, a tax rate change was enacted in Chile, resulting in a current tax expense of $2 million.

In fourth quarter 2014, a tax rate change was enacted in Peru, reducing corporate income tax rates. This resulted in a deferred tax expense of $18 million due to recording the deferred tax asset in Peru at the lower rates.



Financial Condition Review

Summary Balance Sheet and Key Financial Ratios

($ millions, except ratios and share amounts)

As at December 31 2015 2014

Total cash and equivalents $ 2,455 $ 2,699 Current assets 3,013 3,451 Non-current assets 20,840 27,729

Total Assets $26,308 $ 33,879

Current liabilities excluding short-term debt $ 1,644 $ 2,154 Non-current liabilities excluding long-term debt 5,241 5,782 Debt (current and long-term) 9,968 13,081

Total Liabilities $16,853 $ 21,017

Total shareholders’ equity 7,178 10,247 Non-controlling interests 2,277 2,615

Total Equity $ 9,455 $ 12,862

Total common shares outstanding (millions of shares)1 1,165 1,165

Key Financial Ratios:

Current ratio2 2.77:1 2.47:1 Debt-to-equity3 1.05:1 1.02:1

1. Total common shares outstanding do not include 2.9 million stock options. 2. Represents current assets (excluding assets held-for-sale) divided by current liabilities (including short-term debt and excluding liabilities held-for-sale)

as at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014.3. Represents debt divided by total shareholders’ equity (including minority interest) as at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014.

Balance Sheet ReviewTotal assets were $26.3 billion at December 31, 2015, $7.6 billion lower than at December 31, 2014, primarily reflecting our 2015 dispositions as well as $3.9 billion of impairment charges recognized in 2015. Our asset base is primarily comprised of non-current assets such as property, plant and equipment and goodwill, reflecting the capital intensive nature of the mining business and our history of growing through acquisitions. Other significant assets include production inventories, indirect taxes and other government receivables, and cash and equivalents. We typically do not carry a material accounts receivable balance, since only sales of concentrate and copper cathode have a settlement period. Total liabilities at December 31, 2015 totaled $16.9 billion, approximately $4.2 billion lower than at December 31, 2014, reflecting $3.1 billion of debt repayments made during the year combined with a decrease in accruals.

Shareholders’ EquityAs at February 8, 2016 Number of shares

Common shares 1,165,081,379 Stock options 2,558,335

Comprehensive IncomeComprehensive income consists of net income or loss, together with certain other economic gains and losses, which, collectively, are described as “other comprehensive income” or “OCI”, and excluded from the income statement.

For 2015 other comprehensive income was a loss of $67 million on an after-tax basis. The loss reflected losses of $177 million on hedge contracts designated for future periods, caused primarily by changes in currency exchange rates, copper prices, and fuel prices, $56 million in losses for currency translation adjustments, and $11 million of losses recorded as a result of changes



in the fair value of investments held during the quarter, partially offset by reclassification adjustments totaling $131 million for losses on hedge contracts designated for 2015 (or lost hedge effectiveness in 2015) that were transferred to earnings or PPE in conjunction with the recognition of the related hedge exposure, a $20 million gain due to tax recovery on the overall decrease in OCI, $18 million of gains recorded as a result of realized changes on equity investments, and $8 million actuarial gains on our pension liability.

Included in accumulated other comprehensive income at December 31, 2015 were unrealized pre-tax losses on currency, commodity and interest rate hedge contracts totaling $140 million. The balance relates to fuel and currency hedge contracts that are designated against operating costs and capital expenditures, primarily over the next few years, including $14 million remaining in crystallized hedge losses related to our Australian dollar contracts that were settled in third quarter 2012 or closed out in the second half of 2013 and $16 million in crystallized hedge gains related to our silver contracts. These hedge gains/losses are expected to be recorded in earnings at the same time the corresponding hedged operating costs/depreciation are recorded in earnings.

Financial Position and LiquidityOur capital structure comprises a mix of debt and shareholders’ equity. As at December 31, 2015, our total debt was $10 billion (debt net of cash and equivalents was $7.5 billion) and our debt-to-equity ratio was 1.05:1. This compares to debt as at December 31, 2014 of $13.1 billion (debt net of cash and equivalents was $10.4 billion), and a debt-to-equity ratio of 1.02:1. Our $4.0 billion revolving credit facility is fully undrawn and $3.66 billion expires in January 2021 with the remaining amount expiring in January 2020.

At the beginning of 2015, we set a debt reduction target of $3 billion and we achieved that goal through a series of debt repayments totaling $3.1 billion. Total debt has been reduced by 24 percent over the same period, from $13.1 billion to $10 billion, significantly reducing our near-term debt repayment obligations. We currently have less than $250 million in debt due before 2018 and approximately $5 billion of our $10 billion in outstanding debt matures after 2032.

Our primary source of liquidity is our operating cash flow, which is dependent on the ability of our operations to deliver projected future cash flows. In July 2015, the company’s Board of Directors reduced the quarterly dividend by 60 percent to $0.02 per share as a prudent measure to increase financial flexibility in light of current market conditions3. The Board of Directors also approved a Dividend Reinvestment Plan (the “DRIP”), which was made available to eligible shareholders for the first time with payment of the above-mentioned dividend on September 15, 2015 to shareholders of record on August 31, 2015. The DRIP allows registered or beneficial holders of Barrick’s common shares who reside in Canada or the United States to reinvest cash dividends paid on their common shares in additional common shares at a discount to the average market price (as defined in the DRIP), currently set at 3% and subject to change at the discretion of the Board of Directors. Other options to enhance liquidity include drawing the $4.0 billion available under our credit facility (subject to compliance with covenants and the making of certain representations and warranties, this facility is available for drawdown as a source of financing); further non-core asset sales or joint venture opportunities; and issuance of debt or equity securities in the public markets or to private investors, which could be undertaken for liquidity enhancement and/or in connection with establishing a strategic partnership. Many factors, including but not limited to, general market conditions and then prevailing metals prices could impact our ability to issue securities on acceptable terms, as could our credit ratings. Moody’s and S&P currently rate our long-term debt Baa3 and BBB-, respectively, after our credit ratings were downgraded during the year by S&P on March 2, 2015 to BBB- (stable) and by Moody’s on August 12, 2015 to Baa3 (stable), both of which are the lowest investment grade ratings. On January 21, 2016, Moody’s placed Barrick’s long-term debt rating on review for downgrade. Further changes in our ratings could affect the trading prices of our securities and our cost of capital. If we were to borrow under our credit facility, the applicable interest rate on the amounts borrowed would be based, in part, on our credit ratings at the time. The key financial covenant in our fully undrawn credit facility requires Barrick to maintain a net debt to total capitalization ratio of less than 0.60:1. Barrick’s net debt to total capitalization was 0.44:1 as at December 31, 2015.

3. The declaration and payment of dividends is at the discretion of the Board of Directors and will depend on the Company’s financial results, cash requirements, future prospects and other factors deemed relevant by the Board.



Cash and Equivalents and Cash FlowTotal cash and cash equivalents as at December 31, 2015 was $2.5 billion4. Our cash position consists of a mix of term deposits, treasury bills and money market investments and is primarily denominated in US dollars.

Summary of Cash Inflow (Outflow)

($ millions) For the years ended December 31 2015 2014

Operating inflows $ 2,794 $ 2,296

Investing activities Capital expenditures1 $ (1,713) $ (2,432) Divestitures 1,904 166 Other 59 316

Total investing inflows/(outflows) $ 250 $ (1,950)

Financing activities Net change in debt $ (3,133) $ (47) Dividends (160) (232) Proceeds from divestment of 10% of issued ordinary share capital of Acacia – 186 Other 18 33

Total financing inflows/(outflows) $ (3,275) $ (60)

Effect of exchange rate (13) (11)

Increase/(decrease) in cash and equivalents $ (244) $ 275

1. The amounts include capitalized interest of $17 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 (2014: $29 million).

In 2015, we generated $2,794 million in operating cash flow, compared to $2,296 million of operating cash flow in the prior year. The increase in operating cash flow primarily reflects a $610 million deposit received in third quarter 2015 relating to the Pueblo Viejo gold and silver streaming arrangement, partially offset by lower realized gold and copper prices. The most significant driver of the

change in operating cash flow is market gold and copper prices. The ability of our operations to deliver projected future cash flows within the parameters of a reduced production profile, as well as future changes in gold and copper market prices, either favorable or unfavorable, will continue to have a material impact on our cash flow and liquidity. The principal uses of operating cash flow are to fund our capital expenditures and interest.

Cash inflows from investing activities in 2015 amounted to $250 million compared to $1,950 million of cash outflows in the prior year. The increase of $2,200 million compared to 2014 is primarily due to $1,904 million of proceeds from the divestiture of our Cowal mine and 50% of our interest in the Porgera mine in third quarter 2015 and our Ruby Hill mine, Spring Valley project and 50% of our interest in the Zaldívar mine in fourth quarter 2015 combined with a decrease in capital expenditures. In 2015, capital expenditures on a cash basis were $1,713 million compared to $2,432 million in 2014. The decrease of $719 million is primarily due to a decrease in project capital expenditures due to a reduction in costs related to our Pascua-Lama project as it entered deep suspension in 2015 combined with a decrease in minesite expansion capital expenditures due to a reduction in costs related to the construction of the thiosulfate circuit at Goldstrike, which entered commercial production in third quarter 2015.

Net financing cash outflows for 2015 amounted to $3,275 million, compared to $60 million of cash outflows in the prior year. The net financing cash outflows in 2015 primarily consist of $3,142 million of debt repayments as we achieved our debt reduction goal for 2015 compared to $188 million in debt repayments in 2014.

4. Includes $621 million cash held at Acacia and Pueblo Viejo, which may not be readily deployed outside of Acacia and/or Pueblo Viejo.



Summary of Financial InstrumentsAs at December 31, 2015

Financial Instrument

Principal/ Notional Amount

Associated Risks

Cash and equivalents $ 2,455 million

n Interest rate

n Credit

Accounts receivable

$ 275 million

n Credit

n Market

Other investments

$ 8 million

n Market

n Liquidity

Accounts payable $ 1,158 million n Liquidity

Debt $ 10,045 million n Interest rate

Restricted share units $ 39 million n Market

Deferred share units $ 4 million n Market

Derivative instruments – currency contracts AUD 87 million n Interest rate

Derivative instruments – energy contracts Diesel 6 million bbls

n Market/liquidity

n Credit

n Interest rate

Derivative instruments – interest rate contracts Receive float interest rate swaps $ 128 million n Market/liquidity

Review of Operating Segments PerformanceBarrick’s business is organized into fourteen individual minesites, one publicly traded company and one project. Barrick’s Chief Operating Decision Maker (“CODM”), the President, reviews the operating results, assesses performance and makes capital allocation decisions at the minesite, Company and/or project level. Therefore, each individual minesite and Acacia are operating segments for financial reporting purposes. For segment reporting purposes, we present our reportable operating segments as follows: eight individual gold mines, two individual copper mines, Acacia and our Pascua-Lama project. The remaining operating segments have been grouped into an “other” category consisting of our remaining gold mines. The prior periods have been restated to reflect the change in presentation.

Segment performance is evaluated based on a number of measures including operating income before tax, production levels and unit production costs. Certain costs are managed on a consolidated basis and are therefore not reflected in segment income. Starting January 1, 2015, we transferred most of the functional services to minesites in order to hold the minesites directly accountable for the cost of the functional services they require to run their business, resulting in the allocation of our general and administration costs to individual minesites.

Operating Segments Performance



Summary of Operations 2015 20141

Gold Gold Cash All-in Gold Gold Cash All-in produced sold costs sustaining produced sold costs sustaining For the years ended December 31 (ozs) (ozs) ($/oz) costs ($/oz) (ozs) (ozs) ($/oz) costs ($/oz)

Cortez 999 982 $ 486 $ 603 902 865 $ 498 $ 706 Goldstrike 1,053 999 522 658 902 908 571 854 Pueblo Viejo (60%) 572 597 467 597 665 667 446 588 Lagunas Norte 560 565 329 509 582 604 379 543 Veladero 602 629 552 946 722 724 566 815

Total Core Mines 3,786 3,772 $ 480 $ 660 3,773 3,768 $ 500 $ 716

Turquoise Ridge (75%) 217 202 $ 581 $ 742 195 200 $ 473 $ 628 Porgera (47.5%)2 436 426 791 1,018 493 507 915 996 Kalgoorlie (50%) 320 315 752 886 326 330 817 1,037 Acacia (63.9%)3 468 461 772 1,112 470 459 732 1,105 Hemlo 219 216 708 895 206 223 829 1,059 Round Mountain (50%)4 192 190 710 910 164 171 936 1,170 Bald Mountain4 191 202 628 1,132 161 161 724 1,070 Golden Sunlight 68 76 1,098 1,379 86 83 893 1,181

Total Continuing Operations 5,897 5,860 $ 573 $ 779 5,874 5,902 $ 607 $ 827

Cowal 156 158 $ 560 $ 621 268 270 $ 608 $ 787 Pierina 54 53 880 1,411 17 19 1,419 2,278 Ruby Hill 10 12 628 696 33 33 637 713 Kanowna – – – – 39 37 641 674 Plutonic – – – – 7 8 1,120 1,206 Marigold (33%) – – – – 11 15 1,001 1,197

Total Divested/Closed Sites 220 223 $ 640 $ 813 375 382 $ 680 $ 869

Total Gold5 6,117 6,083 $ 575 $ 780 6,249 6,284 $ 612 $ 830

Total Consolidated Barrick 6,117 6,083 $ 596 $ 831 6,249 6,284 $ 598 $ 864

Copper Copper C1 cash All-in Copper Copper C1 cash All-in produced sold costs sustaining produced sold costs sustaining (lbs) (lbs) ($/lb) costs ($/lb) (lbs) (lbs) ($/lb) costs ($/lb)

Zaldívar6 218 215 $ 1.74 $ 2.11 222 222 $ 1.79 $ 2.30 Lumwana 287 295 1.72 2.42 214 213 2.08 3.15 Jabal Sayid 6 – – – – – – –

Total Copper 511 510 $ 1.73 $ 2.33 436 435 $ 1.92 $ 2.79

1. 2014 cash costs per ounce for individual minesites have been restated to exclude the impact of hedges.2. Porgera presented on a 95% basis until August 31, 2015 and a 47.5% basis thereafter.3. Acacia presented on a 73.9% basis until February 28, 2014 and a 63.9% basis thereafter.4. Round Mountain and Bald Mountain were divested in first quarter 2016.5. Total gold cash costs and all-in sustaining costs per ounce exclude the impact of hedges and/or costs allocated to non-operating sites. 6. Zaldívar presented on a 100% basis until November 30, 2015 and a 50% basis thereafter.



Financial ResultsSegment EBIT for 2015 was 27% lower than the prior year primarily due to a lower realized gold price and higher depreciation, partially offset by an increase in sales volume.

In 2015, gold production was 11% higher than the prior year primarily due to the processing of higher grade ore from the open pit combined with higher recoveries due to the shift in 2015 towards processing higher grade refractory ore through the roaster. Further contributing to the favorable variance was an increase in underground production. This was partially offset by fewer tonnes processed due to a decrease in ore placed on the leach pad due to the concentration of mining in Cortez Hills phase 4, which was primarily low grade leach ore, combined with the processing of lower grade stockpile ore, whereas higher grade ore from Cortez Hills phase 3 was available for processing in the prior year.

We made a commitment towards continuous improvement of our cost structure by increasing operational efficiency from underground operations and reducing contractor services costs across the site, which is reflected in part in the lower cash costs per ounce. In 2015, cost of sales was 20% higher than the prior year primarily due to the recognition of $75 million in inventory write-downs in the first half of 2015 as a result of the mining of lower grade ore combined with the impact of a high depreciation base and ounces

mined from the Cortez Hills open pit, as well as the impact of lower capitalized stripping costs from Cortez Hills phase 4, which was in a stripping phase for most of 2014. This was partially offset by a $28 per ounce decrease in open pit costs resulting from a reduction in fuel costs, improved fleet efficiency, as well as lower labor costs. Total savings in open pit costs for 2015

Cortez, Nevada USA

Summary of Operating Data

For the years ended December 31 2015 2014 % Change 2013

Total tonnes mined (000s) 151,357 152,146 (1%) 134,007Ore tonnes processed (000s) 22,406 25,957 (14%) 19,999Average grade (grams/tonne) 1.73 1.34 29% 2.59 Gold produced (000s/oz) 999 902 11% 1,337Gold sold (000s/oz) 982 865 14% 1,371Cost of sales ($ millions) $ 826 $ 687 20% $ 636 Cash costs (per oz)1 $ 486 $ 498 (2%) $ 229 All-in sustaining costs (per oz)1 $ 603 $ 706 (15%) $ 440 All-in costs (per oz)1 $ 650 $ 728 (11%) $ 536

Summary of Financial Data


Segment EBIT ($ millions) $ 287 $ 393 (27%) $ 1,289 Segment EBITDA ($ millions)1 $ 630 $ 648 (3%) $ 1,610 Capital expenditures ($ millions)2 $ 148 $ 189 (22%) $ 396 Minesite sustaining $ 101 $ 170 (41%) $ 264 Minesite expansion $ 47 $ 19 147% $ 132

1. These are non-GAAP financial performance measures; for further information and a detailed reconciliation, please see pages 76 – 85 of this MD&A.2 Amounts presented exclude capitalized interest.

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

750

1,500

2014 2015 2016E

PRODUCTION(000s ounces)

902 999 900to

1,000

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

500

1,000

2014 2015 2016E

AISC($ per ounce)

$ 706$ 603 $ 640

to$ 710



was $40 million, of which $12 million is reflected in capitalized stripping costs and the change in inventory for the year. Processing costs were also lower due to the processing of fewer tonnes in comparison to the prior year.

Cash costs were $12 per ounce lower than the prior year primarily due to the impact of higher sales volume on unit production costs, partially offset by the higher cost of sales. All-in sustaining costs decreased by $103 per ounce from the prior year primarily due to a reduction in minesite sustaining capital expenditures as a result of lower capitalized stripping costs combined with the impact of the lower cash costs.

In 2015, capital expenditures decreased by 22% from the prior year. The decrease was primarily due to a reduction in minesite sustaining capital expenditures due to lower capitalized stripping costs, partially offset by an increase in minesite expansion capital expenditures relating to Lower Zone expansion projects.

OutlookAt Cortez we expect 2016 gold production to be in the range of 900 to 1,000 thousand ounces, which is in line with 2015 production levels. The underground ore grade is expected to decline as the mine transitions to lower grade ore zones deeper in the deposit. This is offset by an increase in open pit production, primarily from leach, as the open pit encounters larger volumes of this material in the 2016 mine plan.

In 2016, we expect cash costs to be in the range of $480 to $530 per ounce, which is consistent with 2015. All-in sustaining costs are expected to be in the range of $640 to $710 per ounce, higher than 2015, primarily due to higher sustaining capital expenditures due to planned hydrology, dewatering and other water management projects scheduled to occur in 2016 combined with a shift in timing of open pit haul truck capitalized maintenance from 2015 to 2016.



Goldstrike, Nevada USA



Total tonnes mined (000s)1 72,304 81,410 (11%) 87,350 Ore tonnes processed (000s) 6,752 5,307 27% 6,829 Average grade (grams/tonne) 6.01 6.28 (4%) 5.01 Gold produced (000s/oz) 1,053 902 17% 892 Gold sold (000s/oz) 999 908 10% 887Cost of sales ($ millions) $ 722 $ 651 11% $ 662 Cash costs (per oz) $ 522 $ 571 (9%) $ 618 All-in sustaining costs (per oz) $ 658 $ 854 (23%) $ 913 All-in costs (per oz) $ 691 $ 1,170 (41%) $ 1,165



Segment EBIT ($ millions) $ 408 $ 496 (18%) $ 581 Segment EBITDA ($ millions) $ 600 $ 628 (5%) $ 693 Capital expenditures ($ millions) $ 143 $ 532 (73%) $ 474 Minesite sustaining $ 110 $ 245 (55%) $ 251 Minesite expansion $ 33 $ 287 (89%) $ 223

1. Includes tonnes mined relating to South Arturo.

Financial ResultsSegment EBIT for 2015 was 18% lower than the prior year primarily due to a lower realized gold price and higher depreciation expense, partially offset by an increase in sales volume.

In 2015, gold production was 17% higher than the prior year primarily as a result of higher production from the autoclave due to the commissioning of the thiosulfate circuit in third quarter 2015 combined with the processing of higher grade ore from the Banshee zone of the underground.

We made a commitment towards continuous improvement of our cost structure by focusing our efforts on incremental improvements in the allocation of sustaining capital by directing spend towards projects with high returns and in lowering underground contractor services costs through the use of insourcing. These efforts are reflected in part in the lower 2015 cash costs per ounce. In 2015, cost of sales was 11% higher primarily due to an increase in tonnes mined from the North Betze layback, as it was in a stripping phase in 2014, resulting in a reduction in capitalized development costs, combined with an increase in depreciation expense in part as a result of the commissioning of the thiosulfate circuit in 2015. This was partially offset by a decrease in the open pit and underground mining costs driven by a reduction in fuel costs and fuel consumption as a result

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

750

1,500

2014 2015 2016E


9021,053 975

to1,075

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

500

1,000

2014 2015 2016E

AISC($ per ounce)

$ 854

$ 658$ 780

to$ 850

of shorter hauls combined with lower contractor services costs due to an increase in the use of internal labor. Savings on fuel costs in 2015 were $21 million, all of which is reflected in capitalized stripping costs and the change in inventory for the year. Cash costs were $49 per ounce lower than the prior year primarily due to



the impact of higher sales volume on unit production costs, which more than offset the increase in cost of sales. All-in sustaining costs decreased $196 per ounce compared to the prior year primarily due to a reduction in minesite sustaining capital expenditures combined with the impact of the lower cash costs.

In 2015, capital expenditures decreased by 73% compared to the prior year. The decrease was primarily due to a reduction in minesite expansion capital expenditures as a result of a reduction in costs associated with the thiosulfate circuit, as it entered commercial production in third quarter 2015, combined with a reduction in capitalized stripping costs relating to the North Betze layback, as ore was reached and stripping activities ended in first quarter 2015.

OutlookAt Goldstrike we expect 2016 production to be in the range of 975 to 1,075 thousand ounces, which is in line with 2015 production levels. Contribution from open pit production is expected to increase as the thiosulfate circuit reaches design capacity in third quarter 2016 and due to the acceleration of mining at Arturo. Underground production is anticipated to be marginally lower due to an increase in underground development.

In 2016, we expect cash costs to be in the range of $560 to $610 per ounce, slightly higher than 2015, and all-in sustaining costs to be $780 to $850 per ounce, an increase from 2015 due to higher sustaining capital expenditures for tailings expansions, water management projects, process improvements, and timing of underground equipment replacements.



Pueblo Viejo (60% basis), Dominican Republic



Total tonnes mined (000s) 22,736 21,055 8% 9,192 Ore tonnes processed (000s) 4,150 4,027 3% 2,658 Average grade (grams/tonne) 4.94 5.53 (11%) 6.14 Gold produced (000s/oz) 572 665 (14%) 488 Gold sold (000s/oz) 597 667 (10%) 444Cost of sales (100%) ($ millions) $ 904 $ 885 2% $ 574 Cash costs (per oz) $ 467 $ 446 5% $ 561 All-in sustaining costs (per oz) $ 597 $ 588 2% $ 735 All-in costs (per oz) $ 597 $ 588 2% $ 800



Segment EBIT (100%) ($ millions) $ 425 $ 669 (36%) $ 430 Segment EBITDA (100%) ($ millions) $ 702 $ 912 (23%) $ 569 Capital expenditures ($ millions) $ 61 $ 80 (24%) $ 101 Minesite sustaining $ 61 $ 80 (24%) $ 73 Minesite expansion – – – – Project capex – – – $ 28

Financial ResultsSegment EBIT for 2015 was 36% lower than the prior year primarily due to a lower realized gold price combined with a decrease in sales volume, partially offset by a lower cost of sales.

In 2015, gold production was 14% lower than the prior year primarily due to lower ore grades and recoveries as the ore mined in 2015 was from the upper benches of Montenegro and Moore phase 2, which contain a higher proportion of carbonaceous ore which has lower recoveries. Production was also negatively impacted by a mechanical failure at the Oxygen Plant in fourth quarter 2015 which resulted in lower tonnes milled. The mine’s swift reaction to this incident, quickly sourcing a temporary solution and replacement, minimized the overall impact.

We made a commitment towards continuous improvement of our cost structure by focusing on increasing autoclave availability, assessing alternatives to reduce energy costs, and improving gold and silver recoveries through improvements in pit design and targeting, as well as continued use of contracted services re-handling resulting in more efficient use of the loaders. Despite these efforts, in 2015 cost of sales was 2%

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

500

1,000

2014 2015 2016E


665572 600

to650

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

500

1,000

2014 2015 2016E

AISC($ per ounce)

$ 588 $ 597 $ 570to

$ 620

higher than the prior year, driven in part by the mechanical failures that occurred in fourth quarter 2015, partially offset by lower processing costs including lower energy and diesel costs. Cash costs were $21 per ounce higher



than the prior year primarily due to the impact of the lower sales volume on unit production costs. All-in sustaining costs increased by $9 per ounce compared to the prior year primarily due to the higher cash costs, partially offset by a reduction in minesite sustaining capital expenditures.

In 2015, capital expenditures decreased by 24% compared to the prior year. The decrease was primarily due to the deferral and cancellation of non-critical minesite sustaining capital expenditures in 2015.

OutlookAt Pueblo Viejo, we expect our equity share of 2016 gold production to be in the range of 600 to 650 thousand ounces, higher than 2015 production levels. In 2016, we expect improved throughput and plant availability as compared to 2015 primarily due to overcoming the issues related to the Oxygen Plant motor failures which negatively impacted 2015 throughput. In addition, we

are currently focusing on improving efficiency and throughput through projects such as ore blending optimization, increasing autoclave availability, and optimization of maintenance strategies.

World’s largest autoclaves 220 tonnes per hour; further optimization potential exists

We expect cash costs to be in the range of $440 to $480 per ounce and all-in sustaining costs to be $570 to $620 per ounce. Cash costs and all-in sustaining costs are expected to be lower than in 2015 primarily due to an increase in gold ounces sold, and higher silver by-product credits, as silver recoveries are expected to improve in 2016 due to improvements in the Lime Boil Circuit.



Lagunas Norte, Peru



Total tonnes mined (000s) 49,126 50,030 (2%) 36,934 Ore tonnes processed (000s) 21,880 22,110 (1%) 21,089 Average grade (grams/tonne) 1.02 0.99 3% 1.06 Gold produced (000s/oz) 560 582 (4%) 606 Gold sold (000s/oz) 565 604 (6%) 591Cost of sales ($ millions) $ 378 $ 335 13% $ 281 Cash costs (per oz) $ 329 $ 379 (13%) $ 361 All-in sustaining costs (per oz) $ 509 $ 543 (6%) $ 627 All-in costs (per oz) $ 509 $ 543 (6%) $ 627



Segment EBIT ($ millions) $ 285 $ 439 (35%) $ 548 Segment EBITDA ($ millions) $ 454 $ 531 (15%) $ 602 Capital expenditures ($ millions) $ 67 $ 81 (17%) $ 139 Minesite sustaining $ 67 $ 81 (17%) $ 139 Minesite expansion – – – –

Financial ResultsSegment EBIT for 2015 was 35% lower than the prior year primarily due to a lower realized gold price combined with a lower sales volume and increased depreciation, partially offset by a reduction in direct operating costs.

In 2015, gold production was 4% lower than the prior year primarily due to the processing of lower recovery ore as the life of the mine progresses to more complex sulfide ore, partially offset by the acceleration in the recovery of ounces as a result of the new leach pad and increased capacity provided by the carbon-in-circuit and Merrill-Crowe plants, which were both commissioned at the end of 2014, combined with the processing of higher grade ore.

We made a commitment towards continuous improvement of our cost structure by focusing our efforts on improving capital productivity, reducing general and administrative costs, improving contract sourcing, and reducing explosives consumption, which is reflected in part in the lower cash costs per ounce. In 2015, cost of sales was 13% higher than the prior year primarily due to an increase in depreciation expense arising from the depreciation of the carbon-in-circuit plant and new phase 5 leach pad and related facilities as well as the newly commissioned water treatment plant. This was partially offset by lower mining costs primarily due to a reduction in fuel costs as a result of the decline in fuel prices, and lower labor costs. Cash costs were

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

500

1,000

2014 2015 2016E


582 560410to

450

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

500

1,000

2014 2015 2016E

AISC($ per ounce)

$ 543 $ 509$ 570

to$ 640

$50 per ounce lower than the prior year primarily due to the above reductions in fuel and labor costs combined with a decrease in royalty expense, which more than offset the impact of decreased sales volume on unit production costs. All-in sustaining costs decreased by $34 per ounce from the prior year primarily due to a reduction in minesite sustaining capital expenditures combined with the impact of the lower cash costs.



In 2015, capital expenditures decreased by 17% compared to the prior year primarily due to the completion in 2014 of the carbon-in-circuit plant, water treatment plants and the new phase 5 leach pad and related facilities. Capital expenditures in 2015 primarily related to the construction of the phase 6 leach pad.

In 2008, the government of Peru adopted more stringent environmental water quality standards, including some that exceed international standards. In 2012, the Lagunas Norte mine submitted a compliance plan in respect of the new water quality standards, including a request for relief from certain parameters exceeding international standards, along with a description of the required additional water treatment infrastructure and its implementation schedule. In December 2015, the government modified the 2008 water quality standards in various respects, including to better align with international standards and provided a new implementation schedule. In 2016, the Lagunas Norte mine intends to develop and submit an updated compliance plan in accordance with the new regulations.

OutlookAt Lagunas Norte we expect 2016 production to be in the range of 410 to 450 thousand ounces, lower than 2015 production levels, as a result of the progressive depletion of oxide ores, which are being replaced with sulfide ore with lower kinetics and recoveries.

In 2016, we expect cash costs to be in the range of $380 to $420 per ounce and all-in sustaining costs to be in the range of $570 to $640 per ounce. The increase in all-in sustaining costs in comparison with 2015 is driven mainly by the decrease in production, while sustaining capital expenditures maintain a similar level of $67 million, as phase 6 of the leach pad expansion will be completed in 2016. Cost increases will be partially offset by operational improvements including equipment rental reductions, lower consumption ratios, mobile equipment cycle optimization as well as lower royalties and a reduction in costs associated with employee profit sharing.



Veladero, Argentina



Total tonnes mined (000s) 83,409 67,686 23% 78,592 Ore tonnes processed (000s) 28,385 29,500 (4%) 29,086 Average grade (grams/tonne) 0.82 1.00 (17%) 0.94 Gold produced (000s/oz) 602 722 (17%) 641 Gold sold (000s/oz) 629 724 (13%) 659Cost of sales ($ millions) $ 499 $ 554 (10%) $ 568 Cash costs (per oz) $ 552 $ 566 (2%) $ 501 All-in sustaining costs (per oz) $ 946 $ 815 16% $ 833 All-in costs (per oz) $ 946 $ 815 16% $ 833



Segment EBIT ($ millions) $ 216 $ 330 (35%) $ 354 Segment EBITDA ($ millions) $ 324 $ 446 (27%) $ 522 Capital expenditures ($ millions) $ 242 $ 173 40% $ 208 Minesite sustaining $ 242 $ 173 40% $ 208 Minesite expansion – – – –

Financial ResultsSegment EBIT for 2015 was 35% lower than the prior year primarily due to a decrease in sales volume combined with a lower realized gold price, partially offset by a decrease in cost of sales.

In 2015, gold production was 17% lower than the prior year primarily due to lower ore grades from Federico phase 3 combined with a decrease in ore tonnes processed due to adverse climate conditions, partially offset by an increase in recoveries.

We made a commitment towards continuous improvement of our cost structure by focusing our efforts on optimizing capital allocation and recovery of ounces from inventory through management of the leach pad. In 2015, cost of sales was 10% lower than the prior year primarily due to lower operating costs resulting from a reduction in fuel and power costs combined with an increase in capitalized stripping costs. This was partially offset by an increase in the allocation of shared services costs to the site, lower silver credits and the recognition of costs related to the management of the cyanide incident that occurred in third quarter 2015. In 2015, cash costs were $14 per ounce lower than the prior year primarily due to the lower cost of sales, partially offset by the impact of the lower sales volume on unit production costs. All-in sustaining costs

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

500

1,000

2014 2015 2016E


722602 630

to690

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

750

1,500

2014 2015 2016E

AISC($ per ounce)

$ 815$ 946 $ 830

to$ 900

increased by $131 per ounce over the prior year due to an increase in minesite sustaining capital expenditures relating primarily to an increase in capitalized stripping costs combined with the incurrence of costs to improve leach facilities, partially offset by the lower cash costs.



In 2015, capital expenditures increased by 40% compared to the prior year primarily due to an increase in capitalized stripping costs combined with capitalization of costs committed by the mine to improve leach pad facilities as a result of the cyanide incident that occurred in third quarter 2015.

Lowering costs by improving inventory management, maintenance, mining productivity and energy costs

On September 13, 2015, a valve on a leach pad pipeline at the Company’s Veladero mine in San Juan Province, Argentina failed, resulting in a release of cyanide-bearing process solution into a nearby waterway through a diversion channel gate that was open at the time of the incident. Minera Argentina Gold S.A. (“MAGSA”), Barrick’s Argentine subsidiary that operates the Veladero mine, notified regulatory authorities of the situation. Environmental monitoring was conducted by MAGSA and independent third parties following the incident. The Company believes this monitoring demonstrates that the incident posed no risk to human health at downstream communities. A temporary restriction on the addition of new cyanide to the mine’s processing circuit was lifted on September 24, 2015, and mine operations have returned to normal. Monitoring and inspection of the minesite will continue in accordance with a court order.

On October 9, 2015, the San Juan mining authority initiated an administrative sanction process against MAGSA for alleged violations of the mining code relating to the valve failure and release of cyanide-bearing process solution. MAGSA submitted its response to these allegations in October 2015 and provided additional information in January 2016. This process is expected to result in a fine. A decision from the San Juan mining authority is pending.

OutlookAt Veladero we expect 2016 production to be in the range of 630 to 690 thousand ounces, higher compared to 2015 production levels. The increase is primarily as a result of higher mined grade, with advancing phases in both Federico 3 and 4, improved mining productivity delivering more ore to the crusher and run-of-mine (ROM) combined with an improved inventory draw-down relative to 2015 through better operational management of the leach pad.

We expect cash costs in 2016 to be in the range of $550 to $600 per ounce and all-in sustaining costs to be $830 to $900 per ounce, lower than 2015 levels mainly due to the increase in gold production, driving higher sales and lower operating and non-operating costs. At Veladero, a number of initiatives are underway to reduce operating costs mainly in the areas of supply chain and inventory management, maintenance practices, mining productivity and energy costs. Operating costs at Veladero are highly sensitive to local inflation and fluctuations in foreign exchange rates. We have assumed an average ARS:USD exchange rate of 13:1 for the purposes of preparing our cash cost and all-in sustaining cost guidance for 2016; however, we do expect further devaluation of the Argentinean peso which we believe will generally improve competitiveness in Argentina and will also have a significant positive impact on our local labor costs, contractor pricing and therefore our cash costs and all-in sustaining costs. Managing potential pass through effects of devaluation to inflation to sustain gained competitiveness is paramount.

Veladero continues to be subject to restrictions that affect the amount of leach solution. Government regulations set a level limit for the leach solution pond, reducing storage capacity, impacting operational capacity to manage solution balance and reducing leaching kinetics, as ore has to be placed on upper levels of the leach pad under certain conditions to maintain pond level. These restrictions are considered in our 2016 operating guidance.



Turquoise Ridge (75% basis), Nevada USA



Total tonnes mined (000s) 349 312 12% 305 Ore tonnes processed (000s) 390 335 16% 340 Average grade (grams/tonne) 18.82 19.62 (4%) 16.29 Gold produced (000s/oz) 217 195 11% 167 Gold sold (000s/oz) 202 200 1% 162Cost of sales ($ millions) $ 141 $ 111 27% $ 109 Cash costs (per oz) $ 581 $ 473 23% $ 586 All-in sustaining costs (per oz) $ 742 $ 628 18% $ 928 All-in costs (per oz) $ 742 $ 628 18% $ 928



Segment EBIT ($ millions) $ 92 $ 139 (34%) $ 115 Segment EBITDA ($ millions) $ 115 $ 156 (26%) $ 129 Capital expenditures ($ millions) $ 32 $ 30 7% $ 55 Minesite sustaining $ 32 $ 30 7% $ 55 Minesite expansion – – – –

Financial ResultsSegment EBIT for 2015 was 34% lower than the prior year primarily due to a lower realized gold price combined with an increase in cost of sales, partially offset by a slight increase in sales volume.

In 2015, gold production was 11% higher than the prior year primarily due to an increase in tonnes mined and processed resulting from increased manpower and improved equipment availability combined with higher productivity due to the transitioning to fully mechanized topcuts in first quarter 2015, which were then processed in the subsequent quarters. This was partially offset by lower ore grades.

We made a commitment towards continuous improvement of our cost structure by focusing our efforts on improving productivity by using larger excavation dimensions, increasing truck haulage capacities which has improved rock flow in the mine and deferring capital drifting in order to add manpower to support growth in the Footwall Pond Ore area of the mine as opposed to preserving the development area where crews were struggling to achieve expected advance rates. In 2015, cost of sales was 27% higher than the prior year. The increase was primarily due to

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

250

500

2014 2015 2016E


195 217 200to

220

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

500

1,000

2014 2015 2016E

AISC($ per ounce)

$ 628$ 742 $ 770

to$ 850

a decrease in capitalized development costs, higher underground mining costs resulting from increased labor costs as a result of adding manpower to support production growth, combined with an increase in



maintenance costs due to the timing of planned replacement of major components in an effort to improve equipment availability, and higher consumable costs arising from the mining of increased ore tonnes. Cash costs were $108 per ounce higher compared to the prior year primarily due to the higher cost of sales and reduction in capitalized stripping costs, partially offset by the impact of higher sales volume on unit production costs. All-in sustaining costs increased by $114 per ounce over the prior year due to the higher cash costs.

In 2015, capital expenditures increased by 7% compared to the prior year primarily due to higher minesite sustaining capital expenditures for an optimization study and ventilation costs, partially offset by a decrease in capitalized development costs compared to 2014.

OutlookAt Turquoise Ridge we expect 2016 production to be in the range of 200 to 220 thousand ounces (Barrick’s share), in line with 2015 production levels, as mine productivity is expected to improve in 2016. Turquoise Ridge has completely transitioned to mechanized topcuts and standardized equipment allowing for greater mining flexibility with higher reliability and less equipment. Capital and waste development requirement increases in 2016 should not impact ounce delivery.

We expect cash costs in 2016 to be in the range of $560 to $620 per ounce, consistent with 2015, and all-in sustaining costs to be in the range of $770 to $850 per ounce. All-in sustaining costs in 2016 are expected to be higher than 2015 due to increased spend on sustaining capital for the water treatment plant and timing of equipment replacement.



Porgera, Papua New Guinea1



Total tonnes mined (000s) 17,527 15,719 12% 18,628 Ore tonnes processed (000s) 5,006 5,584 (10%) 5,354 Average grade (grams/tonne) 3.59 3.10 16% 3.22 Gold produced (000s/oz) 436 493 (12%) 482 Gold sold (000s/oz) 426 507 (16%) 465Cost of sales ($ millions) $ 375 $ 545 (31%) $ 524 Cash costs (per oz) $ 791 $ 915 (14%) $ 965 All-in sustaining costs (per oz) $ 1,018 $ 996 2% $ 1,361 All-in costs (per oz) $ 1,018 $ 996 2% $ 1,361



Segment EBIT ($ millions) $125 $ 84 49% $ 116 Segment EBITDA ($ millions) $162 $ 164 (1%) $ 190 Capital expenditures ($ millions) $ 93 $ 33 182% $ 171 Minesite sustaining $ 93 $ 33 182% $ 171 Minesite expansion – – – –

1. Porgera is presented on a 95% basis until August 31, 2015 and 47.5% basis thereafter.

Financial ResultsSegment EBIT for 2015 was 49% higher than the prior year primarily due to a decrease in cost of sales, partially offset by a lower realized gold price combined with a decrease in sales volume, reflecting the divestment of 50% of our ownership in Porgera that was completed on August 31, 2015.

In 2015, gold production was 12% lower than the prior year reflecting the lower production attributable to Barrick as a result of the divestment that occurred on August 31 combined with a decrease in recoveries compared to the prior year. Also negatively impacting production in 2015 were prolonged dry conditions and power issues. This was partially offset by the processing of higher grade ore driven by the improved performance from both open pit and underground operations.

Cost of sales for 2015 was 31% lower than the prior year primarily due to lower direct operating costs as a result of lower processing costs, including fuel and power costs, the impact of the devaluation of the Australian dollar, as well as an increase in capitalized stripping costs. Cash costs were $124 per ounce lower than the prior year primarily due to a significant increase in capitalized stripping costs, partially offset by the impact of lower sales volume on unit production costs.

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

500

1,000

2014 2015 2016E


493 436

230to

260

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

750

1,500

2014 2015 2016E

AISC($ per ounce)

$ 996 $ 1,018 $ 990 to

$ 1,080

All-in sustaining costs increased by $22 per ounce over the prior year due to an increase in minesite sustaining capital expenditures, partially offset by the lower cash costs.



In 2015, capital expenditures increased by 182% compared to the prior year. The increase was primarily due to a significant increase in capitalized stripping costs as a result of a change in the 2015 mine plan that increased open pit mining activity, combined with an increase in minesite sustaining capital expenditures due to the commencement of a concentrate export project as well as a gas turbine power management system and controls project.

OutlookAt Porgera we expect 2016 gold production to be in the range of 230 to 260 thousand ounces (Barrick’s 47.5% share). Production is expected to be in line with 2015 levels. Processed tonnes are expected to increase in 2016 when compared to 2015, partially offset by lower

expected head grade. The commencement of concentrate export will allow for stored concentrate to be reclaimed and additional revenue generated during 2016.

Well established asset Highly prospective region Extensive infrastructure Proven technology & team

In 2016, we expect cash costs to be in the range of $700 to $750 per ounce which is lower than 2015 cash costs of $791 per ounce, primarily due to an increase in capitalized stripping in the open pit and underground development. 2016 all-in sustaining costs are expected to be in the range of $990 to $1,080 per ounce, which is higher when compared to 2015, mainly due to the increase in capitalized stripping and sustaining capital, in line with the new mine plan and creation of new infrastructure.



Kalgoorlie (50% basis), Australia



Total tonnes mined (000s) 36,989 34,644 7% 36,445Ore tonnes processed (000s) 5,775 5,809 (1%) 5,924Average grade (grams/tonne) 2.28 2.01 13% 1.97 Gold produced (000s/oz) 320 326 (2%) 315Gold sold (000s/oz) 315 330 (5%) 330Cost of sales ($ millions) $ 307 $ 309 (1%) $ 309 Cash costs (per oz) $ 752 $ 817 (8%) $ 846 All-in sustaining costs (per oz) $ 886 $ 1,037 (15%) $ 1,070 All-in costs (per oz) $ 886 $ 1,037 (15%) $ 1,070



Segment EBIT ($ millions) $ 45 $ 106 (58%) $ 154 Segment EBITDA ($ millions) $119 $ 148 (20%) $ 182 Capital expenditures ($ millions) $ 34 $ 66 (48%) $ 66 Minesite sustaining $ 34 $ 66 (48%) $ 66 Minesite expansion – – – –

Financial ResultsSegment EBIT for 2015 was 58% lower than the prior year primarily due to a lower realized gold price and a reduction in sales volume, partially offset by a decrease in the cost of sales.

In 2015, gold production was 2% lower than the prior year primarily due to lower recoveries combined with a decrease in ore tonnes processed resulting from decreased throughput. The decreased throughput was due to increased maintenance time on the SAG mill as well as operational downtime as a result of issues relating to the conveyor and lube system. This was partially offset by improved ore grades when compared to 2014.

We made a commitment towards continuous improvement of our cost structure by focusing our efforts on improving mine grade through full potential pit sequencing initiatives combined with focused grade control practices, delivering positive grade reconciliation against ore reserves. In 2015, cost of sales was 1% lower than the prior year primarily due to the devaluation of the Australian dollar combined with lower operating costs resulting from lower fuel and power costs. Cash costs were $65 per ounce lower than the prior year

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

250

500

2014 2015 2016E


326 320350to

365

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

750

1500

2014 2015 2016E

AISC($ per ounce)

$ 1,037$ 886

$ 670to

$ 700

0

750

1500

primarily due to the reduction in cost of sales, partially offset by a reduction in capitalized stripping costs and the impact of lower sales volume on unit production costs. All-in sustaining costs decreased by $151 per



ounce from the prior year reflecting the impact of the lower cash costs combined with a decrease in minesite sustaining capital expenditures.

In 2015, capital expenditures decreased by 48% compared to the prior year primarily due to a reduction in capitalized stripping costs at Golden Pike combined with the completion of an emissions reduction program in early 2015.

OutlookAt Kalgoorlie we expect 2016 production to be in the range of 350 to 365 thousand ounces (Barrick’s share), higher than 2015 production levels. The total ore processed in 2016 is expected to be higher than 2015 and an increase in head grade is expected to result in

higher production levels. We are also expecting an increase in sales in 2016, resulting in lower cash costs and all-in sustaining costs. Kalgoorlie’s mine plan reflects a slightly lower mined grade from Golden Pike in the open pit and an associated lower feed grade and mill recovery, partially offset by higher processed tonnes due to an increase in throughput rates in the Fimiston circuit.

In 2016, we expect cash costs to be in the range of $610 to $630 per ounce and all-in sustaining costs to be in the range of $670 to $700 per ounce, lower than 2015, mainly due to the expected decrease in the AUD:USD exchange rate, lower mining costs due to the fall in the price of diesel and reduced sustaining capital expenditures in 2016.



Acacia Mining plc1, Africa


100% basis


Total tonnes mined (000s) 41,390 41,684 (1%) 54,100 Ore tonnes processed (000s) 9,268 8,413 10% 7,980 Average grade (grams/tonne) 2.80 3.00 (7%) 2.86 Gold produced (000s/oz) 732 719 2% 641 Gold sold (000s/oz) 721 704 2% 650 Cost of sales ($ millions)2 $ 837 $ 693 21% $ 756 Cash costs (per oz) $ 772 $ 732 5% $ 812 All-in sustaining costs (per oz) $ 1,112 $ 1,105 1% $ 1,346 All-in costs (per oz) $ 1,111 $ 1,190 (7%) $ 1,519



Segment EBIT ($ millions) $ (1) $ 191 (101%) $ 115 Segment EBITDA ($ millions) $142 $ 320 (56%) $ 275 Capital expenditures ($ millions) $177 $ 251 (29%) $ 385 Minesite sustaining $178 $ 195 (9%) $ 272 Minesite expansion $ (1) $ 56 (102%) $ 113

1. Formerly African Barrick Gold plc.2. Cost of sales includes $109 million of impairments relating to supplies inventory and the long-term stockpile.

Financial ResultsSegment EBIT for 2015 was 101% lower than the prior year primarily due to a lower realized gold price combined with an increase in cost of sales, partially offset by an increase in sales volume.

In 2015, gold production was 2% higher than the prior year primarily due to an increase in production at Bulyanhulu and North Mara, partially offset by decreased production at Buzwagi. In 2015, production at Bulyanhulu increased 17% compared to the prior year primarily due to increased production from the new CIL plant, which was commissioned in fourth quarter 2014, combined with higher recoveries as a result of improvements in the elution circuit, partially offset by slightly lower grade from the underground. The increased production at North Mara in 2015 was primarily due to increased grades from the underground combined with marginally improved throughput and recoveries, partially offset by the mining of lower grade ore from the Nyabirama pit and moving away from the main higher grade ore zone of the Gokona pit. Production at Buzwagi decreased 19% compared to the prior year primarily due to a reduction in grade as the mine focused its efforts in 2015 on movement of waste in order to open access to higher grade areas of the pit to be mined in 2016.

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

250

500

2014 2015 2016E

PRODUCTION (Barrick’s Share)(000s ounces)

470 468 480to

500

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

750

1,500

2014 2015 2016E

AISC($ per ounce)

$ 1,105 $ 1,112$ 950

to$ 980

Cost of sales for 2015 was 21% higher than the prior year primarily due to a decrease in capitalized development and stripping costs combined with an increase in contractor services costs. This was partially offset by lower labor costs as a result of headcount



reductions, the impact of the devaluation of the Tanzanian shilling on local labor costs, and lower energy and fuel costs due to a decrease in fuel prices. Cash costs per ounce were 5% higher than the prior year primarily reflecting the higher cost of sales, partially offset by the impact of higher sales volume on unit production costs. All-in sustaining costs were 1% higher than the prior year as the higher cash costs were partially offset by a decrease in minesite sustaining capital expenditures.

Increasing production at reduced all-in sustaining costs

In 2015, capital expenditures decreased by 29% compared to the prior year. The decreases were primarily due to a reduction in minesite expansion capital expenditures attributable to lower costs relating to the CIL plant, which was commissioned in fourth quarter 2014, combined with a decrease in minesite sustaining capital expenditures arising from a reduction in capitalized stripping costs.

Outlook We expect Acacia’s 2016 gold production to be in the range of 480 to 500 thousand ounces (Barrick’s share), which is higher than 2015 production levels. Acacia’s production is expected to be higher than 2015 mainly due to an expected increase at Buzwagi due to improved access to the main ore body from second quarter 2016 combined with an expected increase in production at North Mara as the Gokona underground is fully ramped up and a second access portal is developed to provide additional flexibility. At Bulyanhulu production is expected to be in line with 2015 production levels as a result of realizing the benefit of operational improvements made over the past two years, including the mechanization of the mine and increase in workforce productivity.

In 2016, we expect cash costs to be in the range of $670 to $700 per ounce, which is lower than 2015 cash costs of $772 per ounce, primarily due to further cost reductions at Bulyanhulu. All-in sustaining costs are expected to be $950 to $980 per ounce, which is lower compared to 2015 mainly due to a reduction in sustaining capital in 2016.



Zaldívar, Chile1



Copper produced (millions of lbs) 218 222 (2%) 279 Copper sold (millions of lbs) 215 222 (3%) 279 Cost of sales ($ millions) $ 424 $ 488 (13%) $ 545 C1 cash costs (per lb) $ 1.74 $ 1.79 (3%) $ 1.65 All-in sustaining costs (per lb)2 $ 2.11 $ 2.30 (8%) $ 1.98



Segment EBIT ($ millions) $104 $ 224 (54%) $ 436 Segment EBITDA ($ millions) $154 $ 297 (48%) $ 520 Capital expenditures ($ millions) $ 85 $ 111 (23%) $ 80 Minesite sustaining $ 85 $ 111 (23%) $ 80 Minesite expansion – – – – Project capex – – – –

1. Zaldívar is presented on a 100% basis until November 30, 2015 and a 50% basis thereafter.2. This is a non-GAAP financial performance measure; for further information and a detailed reconciliation, please see pages 76 – 85 of this MD&A.

Financial ResultsSegment EBIT for 2015 was 54% lower than the prior year primarily due to a lower realized copper price combined with a decrease in sales volume resulting from the divestment of 50% of our ownership in Zaldívar that was completed on December 1, 2015, partially offset by a decrease in cost of sales.

In 2015, copper production was 2% lower than the prior year primarily due to lower production from the heap leach as a result of a severe rain event at the end of first quarter 2015 and subsequent flooding at the mine, which negatively impacted production in the first half of the year. The decrease in 2015 also reflects the lower production attributable to Barrick as a result of the divestment that occurred on December 1, 2015.

Cost of sales for 2015 was 13% lower than the prior year primarily due to a reduction in consumable costs resulting mainly from a decline in fuel prices and power costs combined with a decrease in depreciation expense resulting from the impact of ceasing depreciation of the Zaldívar assets upon reclassifying them as held-for-sale in third quarter 2015, partially offset by an increase in capitalized stripping costs. In 2015, C1 cash costs were 3% lower than the prior

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

250

500

2014 2015 2016E

PRODUCTION(millions pounds)

222 218

100to

120

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0.00

1.25

2.50

2014 2015 2016E

C1 Cash Costs($ per pound)

$ 1.79 $ 1.74 $ 1.70to

$ 1.90

year primarily due to the lower cost of sales, partially offset by the impact of lower sales volume on unit production costs. All-in sustaining costs per pound were $0.19 per pound lower compared to the prior year,



primarily reflecting the effect of the above factors on C1 cash costs combined with the decrease in minesite sustaining capital expenditures.

In 2015, capital expenditures decreased by 23% compared to the prior year primarily due to a reduction in minesite sustaining capital expenditures due to the deferral of expenditures, partially offset by an increase of capitalized stripping costs.

OutlookAt Zaldívar, copper production is expected to be in the range of 100 to 120 million pounds (Barrick’s share), at C1 cash costs in the range of $1.70 to $1.90 per pound and all-in sustaining costs per pound of $2.20 to $2.40 per pound. As a result of the divestment, effective December 1, 2015, Zaldívar is accounted for using the equity method of accounting.



Lumwana, Zambia



Copper produced (millions of lbs) 287 214 34% 260 Copper sold (millions of lbs) 295 213 38% 240 Cost of sales ($ millions) $ 440 $ 470 (6%) $ 567 C1 cash costs (per lb) $ 1.72 $ 2.08 (17%) $ 2.29 All-in sustaining costs (per lb)1 $ 2.42 $ 3.15 (23%) $ 2.81



Segment EBIT ($ millions) $ 53 $ 40 33% $ 87 Segment EBITDA ($ millions) $113 $ 138 (18%) $ 188 Capital expenditures ($ millions) $ 99 $ 181 (45%) $ 262 Minesite sustaining $ 99 $ 181 (45%) $ 262 Minesite expansion – – – – Project capex – – – –

1. This is a non-GAAP financial performance measure; for further information and a detailed reconciliation, please see pages 76 – 85 of this MD&A.

Financial ResultsSegment EBIT for 2015 was 33% higher than the prior year primarily due to an increase in sales volume resulting from the mill shutdown that occurred in second quarter 2014 as a result of the partial collapse of the terminal end of the main conveyor that negatively impacted production combined with a decrease in cost of sales, partially offset by a lower realized copper price.

In 2015, copper production was 34% higher than the prior year primarily due to the conveyor collapse mentioned above combined with improved wet weather preparation in the mine and an increase in operating efficiency compared to the prior year.

Cost of sales for 2015 was 6% lower than the prior year primarily due to cost saving initiatives and improvements in operating efficiencies resulting in lower mining and maintenance costs, as well as a decrease in depreciation expense resulting from the impairment charge taken in 2014 combined with the impact of the devaluation of the Zambian kwacha in 2015. In 2015, C1 cash costs were 17% lower than the prior year primarily reflecting the impact of increased sales volume on unit production costs and a continued positive trend in mining and processing efficiency resulting in a lower unit cost. All-in sustaining costs per pound were $0.73 per pound lower than the prior year primarily reflecting the lower C1 cash costs combined with a decrease in minesite sustaining capital expenditures.

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0

250

500

2014 2015 2016E

PRODUCTION(millions pounds)

214287 270

to290

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0.00

1.25

2.50

2014 2015 2016E

C1 Cash Costs($ per pound)

$ 2.08$ 1.72

$ 1.35to

$ 1.60

In 2015, capital expenditures decreased by 45% compared to the prior year due to a reduction in capitalized stripping costs combined with the deferral of minesite sustaining expenditures.

In July 2015, the Zambian government passed amendments to the country’s mining tax regime that replaced the recently adopted 20 percent gross royalty on open pit mines with a nine percent royalty, along with



the reintroduction of a 30 percent corporate income tax, a 50% of taxable income limitation on the utilization of tax loss carryforwards, and a 15 percent variable profits tax. In third quarter 2015, we evaluated the potential for a reversal of previous impairments recorded in fourth quarter 2014. The current mine plan, lower short-term copper prices and a higher observable discount rate offset the lower royalty rate and therefore no impairment reversal is required at the current time.

Also in second quarter 2015, the Zambian power authority (“ZESCO”) announced a reduction to power generation necessitated by the low water levels in its reservoirs as a result of the poor rainfall experienced during the recent rainy season. We continue to focus on power usage efficiencies and are working closely with ZESCO to manage the power usage within the monthly power cap. This has minimized the impact of power restrictions on operational production in both the mining and processing areas.

OutlookAt Lumwana copper production is expected to be in the range of 270 to 290 million pounds, in line with 2015 production levels, primarily due to an increase in expected total tonnes mined and ore tonnes processed, partially offset by a decrease in expected grade compared to the prior year.

C1 cash costs are expected to be $1.35 to $1.60 per pound, compared to $1.72 per pound in 2015, and all-in sustaining costs are expected to be in the range of $1.90 to $2.20 per pound, compared to $2.42 for 2015. C1 cash costs are expected to be lower than 2015 due to cost reductions and improvements in equipment productivities, and the impact of favorable exchange rate movements in the local currency. All-in sustaining costs are expected to be lower than 2015 due to the cost reductions combined with a lower royalty rate than the 20% rate experienced in the first half of 2015.



future that may result in litigation. If we are unable to resolve these disputes favorably, it may have a material adverse impact on our financial condition, cash flow and results of operations.

Litigation and Claims We are currently subject to various litigation proceedings as disclosed in note 35 to the Financial Statements, and we may be involved in disputes with other parties in the

Contractual Obligations and Commitments Payments due

($ millions) 2021 and As at December 31, 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 thereafter Total

Debt1 Repayment of principal $ 162 $ 123 $ 744 $ 594 $ 503 $ 7,766 $ 9,892 Capital leases 41 37 30 16 9 20 153 Interest 535 535 530 470 436 5,827 8,333 Provisions for environmental rehabilitation2 80 60 57 98 104 1,833 2,232 Operating leases 36 33 28 20 14 30 161 Restricted share units 11 21 4 5 – – 41 Pension benefits and other post-retirement benefits 20 20 20 20 20 371 471 Derivative liabilities3 160 70 32 2 – – 264 Purchase obligations for supplies and consumables4 518 226 137 83 73 114 1,151 Capital commitments5 94 8 6 4 4 4 120 Social development costs6 10 2 3 3 3 198 219

Total $ 1,667 $ 1,135 $ 1,591 $ 1,315 $ 1,166 $ 16,163 $ 23,037

1. Debt and Interest – Our debt obligations do not include any subjective acceleration clauses or other clauses that enable the holder of the debt to call for early repayment, except in the event that we breach any of the terms and conditions of the debt or for other customary events of default. The debt and interest amounts include 100% of the Pueblo Viejo financing, even though our attributable share is 60 percent of this total, consistent with our ownership interest in the mine. We are not required to post any collateral under any debt obligations. Projected interest payments on variable rate debt were based on interest rates in effect at December 31, 2015. Interest is calculated on our long-term debt obligations using both fixed and variable rates.

2. Provisions for Environmental Rehabilitation – Amounts presented in the table represent the undiscounted uninflated future payments for the expected cost of provisions for environmental rehabilitation.

3. Derivative Liabilities – Amounts presented in the table relate to derivative contracts disclosed under note 24C to the Financial Statements. Payments related to derivative contracts may be subject to change given variable market conditions.

4. Purchase Obligations for Supplies and Consumables – Includes commitments related to new purchase obligations to secure a supply of acid, tires and cyanide for our production process.

5. Capital Commitments – Purchase obligations for capital expenditures include only those items where binding commitments have been entered into. 6. Social Development Costs – Includes Pascua-Lama’s commitment related to the potential funding of a power transmission line in Argentina of $114 million, which

is not expected to be paid prior to 2021.

Commitments and Contingencies



Review of Quarterly Results

Quarterly Information1

2015 2014

($ millions, except where indicated) Q4 Q3 Q2 Q1 Q4 Q3 Q2 Q1

Revenues $2,238 $2,315 $2,231 $2,245 $ 2,510 $ 2,624 $ 2,458 $ 2,647 Realized price per ounce – gold3 1,105 1,125 1,190 1,219 1,204 1,285 1,289 1,285 Realized price per pound – copper3 2.16 2.18 2.66 2.55 2.91 3.09 3.17 3.03 Cost of sales 1,768 1,742 1,689 1,708 1,799 1,681 1,631 1,719 Net earnings (loss) (2,622) (264) (9) 57 (2,851) 125 (269) 88 Per share (dollars)2,3 (2.25) (0.23) (0.01) 0.05 (2.45) 0.11 (0.23) 0.08 Adjusted net earnings3 91 131 60 62 174 222 159 238 Per share (dollars)2,3 0.08 0.11 0.05 0.05 0.15 0.19 0.14 0.20 Operating cash flow 698 1,255 525 316 371 852 488 585 Free cash flow3 $ 387 $ 866 $ 26 $ (198) $ (176) $ 199 $ (128) $ (31)

1. Sum of all the quarters may not add up to the annual total due to rounding. 2. Calculated using weighted average number of shares outstanding under the basic method of earnings per share.3. Realized price, adjusted net earnings, adjusted EPS and free cash flow are non-GAAP financial performance measures with no standard meaning under IFRS.

For further information and a detailed reconciliation, please see pages 76 – 85 of this MD&A.

Our recent financial results reflect a trend of declining spot gold prices, and as a result of an emphasis on cost control and maximizing free cash flow, costs have also decreased. Our adjusted net earnings and operating cash flow levels have fluctuated with gold and copper realized prices and production levels each quarter. In fourth quarter 2015, we recorded asset and goodwill impairments of $2.6 billion (net of tax effects and non-controlling interests), primarily related to our Pueblo Viejo and Goldstrike mines and Pascua-Lama project. In third quarter 2015, we recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $476 million relating to our Zaldívar mine upon reclassification of the mine’s net assets as held-for-sale as the agreed selling price is lower than previously recognized carrying values. In fourth quarter 2014, we recorded asset and goodwill impairments of $2.8 billion (net of tax effects and non-controlling interests), primarily at Lumwana, Zaldívar and Cerro Casale. The net loss in second quarter 2014 reflected asset and goodwill impairment charges of $514 million relating to Jabal Sayid as a result of classifying the project as held-for-sale.

Fourth Quarter ResultsIn fourth quarter 2015, we reported a net loss and adjusted net earnings of $2.6 billion and $91 million, respectively, compared to a net loss and adjusted net earnings of $2.9 billion and $174 million, respectively, in fourth quarter 2014. The net loss in fourth quarter 2015

reflects the recording of $2.6 billion (net of tax effects and non-controlling interests) in impairment charges compared to impairment charges of $2.8 billion (net of tax effects and non-controlling interests) recorded in fourth quarter 2014.

The lower net loss reflects an increase in gold sales volume and lower cost of sales in fourth quarter 2015 combined with the recognition of lower impairment charges compared to the same prior year period. The decrease in adjusted net earnings reflects the lower realized gold and copper prices and decrease in copper sales volume in fourth quarter 2015 compared to the same prior year period. This was partially offset by an increase in gold sales volumes compared to fourth quarter 2014.

In fourth quarter 2015, gold and copper sales were 1.64 million ounces and 132 million pounds, respectively, compared to 1.57 million ounces and 139 million pounds, respectively, in fourth quarter 2014. Revenues in fourth quarter 2015 were lower than the same prior year period, reflecting lower market prices for gold and copper and lower copper sales volumes. In fourth quarter 2015, cost of sales was $1.7 billion, a decrease of $31 million compared to the same prior year period, reflecting lower direct mining costs, partially offset by an increase in depreciation expense. Cash costs were $547 per ounce, a decrease of $81 per ounce, primarily due to higher production levels combined with the lower



direct mining costs. C1 cash costs were $1.66 per pound for copper, a decrease of $0.12 per pound from the same prior year period due to lower direct mining costs and lower depreciation expense.

In fourth quarter 2015, operating cash flow was $698 million, up 88% from the same prior year period. The increase in operating cash flow primarily reflects a decrease in income tax payments, partially offset by lower realized gold and copper prices.

Together, the internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures frameworks provide internal control over financial reporting and disclosure. Due to its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting and disclosure may not prevent or detect all misstatements. Further, the effectiveness of internal control is subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with policies or procedures may change.

The management of Barrick, at the direction of our President and Chief Financial Officer, evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of internal control over financial reporting as of the end of the period covered by this report based on the framework and criteria established in Internal Control – Integrated Framework (2013) as issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (COSO) of the Treadway Commission. Based on that evaluation, Management concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2015.

Barrick’s annual management report on internal control over financial reporting and the integrated audit report of Barrick’s auditors for the year ended December 31, 2015 will be included in Barrick’s 2015 Annual Report and its 2015 Form 40-F/Annual Information Form on file with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and Canadian provincial securities regulatory authorities.

Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures. Internal control over financial reporting is a framework designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements in accordance with IFRS. The Company’s internal control over financial reporting framework includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with IFRS, and that receipts and expenditures of the Company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the Company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the Company’s assets that could have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

Disclosure controls and procedures form a broader framework designed to ensure that other financial information disclosed publicly fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company for the periods presented in this MD&A and Barrick’s Annual Report. The Company’s disclosure controls and procedures framework includes processes designed to ensure that material information relating to the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to management by others within those entities to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and Disclosure Controls and Procedures



of the consolidated financial statements, including a summary of current and future changes in accounting policies.

Critical Accounting Estimates and JudgmentsCertain accounting estimates have been identified as being “critical” to the presentation of our financial condition and results of operations because they require us to make subjective and/or complex judgments about matters that are inherently uncertain; or there is a reasonable likelihood that materially different amounts could be reported under different conditions or using different assumptions and estimates. Our significant accounting judgments, estimates and assumptions are disclosed in note 3 of the accompanying financial statements.

Management has discussed the development and selection of our critical accounting estimates with the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors, and the Audit Committee has reviewed the disclosure relating to such estimates in conjunction with its review of this MD&A. The accounting policies and methods we utilize determine how we report our financial condition and results of operations, and they may require management to make estimates or rely on assumptions about matters that are inherently uncertain. The consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (“IASB”) under the historical cost convention, as modified by revaluation of certain financial assets, derivative contracts and post-retirement assets. Our significant accounting policies are disclosed in note 2

IFRS Critical Accounting Policies and Accounting Estimates

Management uses this measure internally to evaluate our underlying operating performance for the reporting periods presented and to assist with the planning and forecasting of future operating results. Management believes that adjusted net earnings is a useful measure of our performance because tax adjustments not related to the current period; impairment charges, gains/losses and other one-time costs relating to asset acquisitions/dispositions and business combinations; and project costs related to restructuring/severance arrangements, project care and maintenance and demobilization costs, do not reflect the underlying operating performance of our core mining business and are not necessarily indicative of future operating results. We also adjust for changes in PER discount rates relating to our closed sites as they are not related to our current operating sites and not necessarily indicative of underlying results. Furthermore, foreign currency translation gains/losses and unrealized gains/losses from non-hedge derivatives are not necessarily reflective of the underlying operating results for the reporting periods presented.

Adjusted Net Earnings and Adjusted Net Earnings per Share Adjusted net earnings is a non-GAAP financial measure which excludes the following from net earnings:n Impairment charges (reversals) related to intangibles,

goodwill, property, plant and equipment, and investments;

n Gains/losses and other one-time costs relating to acquisitions/dispositions;

n Foreign currency translation gains/losses; n Significant tax adjustments not related to current

period earnings;n Costs related to restructuring/severance arrangements,

care and maintenance and demobilization costs, and other expenses not related to current operations;

n Unrealized gains/losses on non-hedge derivative instruments; and

n Change in the measurement of the provision for environmental rehabilitation (“PER”) at closed sites.

Non-GAAP Financial Performance Measures



performance of our business segments and a review of the non-GAAP measures used by mining industry analysts and other mining companies.

Adjusted net earnings is intended to provide additional information only and does not have any standardized definition under IFRS and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for measures of performance prepared in accordance with IFRS. The measures are not necessarily indicative of operating profit or cash flow from operations as determined under IFRS. Other companies may calculate these measures differently. The following table reconciles these non-GAAP measures to the most directly comparable IFRS measure.

As noted, we use this measure for internal purposes. Management’s internal budgets and forecasts and public guidance do not reflect potential impairment charges, potential gains/losses on the acquisition/disposition of assets, foreign currency translation gains/losses, or unrealized gains/losses on non-hedge derivatives. Consequently, the presentation of adjusted net earnings enables investors and analysts to better understand the underlying operating performance of our core mining business through the eyes of Management. Management periodically evaluates the components of adjusted net earnings based on an internal assessment of performance measures that are useful for evaluating the operating

Reconciliation of Net Earnings to Adjusted Net Earnings and Adjusted Net Earnings per Share1

For the years For the three months ended Dec. 31 ended Dec. 31

($ millions, except per share amounts in dollars) 2015 2014 2013 2015 2014

Net earnings (loss) attributable to equity holders of the Company $(2,838) $ (2,907) $ (10,366) $(2,622) $ (2,851) Impairment charges related to intangibles, goodwill, property, plant and equipment, and investments2 3,119 3,394 11,536 2,639 2,848 Acquisition/disposition (gains)/losses3 (263) (48) 442 (183) (13) Foreign currency translation (gains)/losses4 177 169 233 186 (17) Tax adjustments5 59 (49) 297 47 63 Other expense adjustments6 81 97 483 23 6 Unrealized losses/(gains) on non-hedge derivative instruments7 9 137 (56) 1 138

Adjusted net earnings $ 344 $ 793 $ 2,569 $ 91 $ 174

Net earnings (loss) per share8 (2.44) (2.50) (10.14) (2.25) (2.45) Adjusted net earnings per share8 0.30 0.68 2.51 0.08 0.15

1. Amounts presented in this table are after-tax and net of non-controlling interest.2. Impairment charges for the three months and year ended December 31, 2015 is presented net of tax and non-controlling interest ($767) million and ($779) million

benefit, respectively (2014: ($716) million and ($712) million benefit, respectively; 2013: ($1,150) million benefit). 3. Acquisition/disposition losses for the three months and year ended December 31, 2015 is presented net of tax and non-controlling interest $77 million and

$76 million expense, respectively (2014: nil and $2 million expense, respectively; 2013: ($38) million benefit).4. Foreign currency translation losses for the three months and year ended December 31, 2015 is presented net of tax and non-controlling interest $11 million expense

and ($5) million benefit, respectively (2014: ($6) million and ($8) million benefit, respectively; 2013: $4 million expense).5. Tax adjustments for the three months and year ended December 31, 2015 is presented net of non-controlling interest $5 million and $13 million, respectively

(2014: nil; 2013: $135 million).6. Other expense adjustments for the three months and year ended December 31, 2015 is presented net of tax and non-controlling interest ($17) million and

($53) million benefit, respectively (2014: ($3) million and ($22) million benefit, respectively; 2013: ($76) million benefit). 7. Unrealized losses/(gains) on non-hedge derivative instruments for the three months and year ended December 31, 2015 is presented net of tax and non-controlling

interest ($5) million and ($3) million benefit, respectively (2014: ($45) million and ($44) million benefit, respectively; 2013: ($6) million benefit). 8. Calculated using weighted average number of shares outstanding under the basic method of earnings per share.



Cash Costs per ounce, All-in Sustaining Costs per ounce, All-in Costs per ounce, C1 Cash Costs per pound and All-in Sustaining Costs per poundBeginning with our 2012 Annual Report, we adopted a non-GAAP “all-in sustaining costs per ounce” measure based on the expectation that the World Gold Council (“WGC”) (a market development organization for the gold industry comprised of and funded by 18 gold mining companies from around the world, including Barrick) was developing a similar metric. The WGC is not a regulatory organization. In June 2013, the WGC published its definition of “adjusted operating costs”, “all-in sustaining costs” and also a definition of “all-in costs” and in second quarter 2013, Barrick voluntarily adopted the definition of these metrics. The “all-in sustaining costs” measure is similar to our presentation in reports prior to second quarter 2013, with the exception of the classification of sustaining capital. In our previous calculation, certain capital expenditures were presented as mine expansion projects, whereas they meet the definition of sustaining capital expenditures under the WGC definition, and therefore these expenditures have been reclassified as sustaining capital expenditures. Starting in fourth quarter 2014,

the non-GAAP “adjusted operating costs” was renamed “cash costs”. The manner in which this measure is calculated was not changed.

Our “all-in costs” measure starts with “all-in sustaining costs” and adds additional costs which reflect the varying costs of producing gold over the life-cycle of a mine, including: non-sustaining capital expenditures (capital expenditures at new projects and capital expenditures at existing operations related to projects that significantly increase the net present value of the mine and are not related to current production) and other non-sustaining costs (primarily exploration and evaluation (“E&E”) costs, community relations costs and general and administrative costs that are not associated with current operations). This definition recognizes that there are different costs associated with the life-cycle of a mine, and that it is therefore appropriate to distinguish between sustaining and non-sustaining costs. We believe that our use of “all-in sustaining costs” and “all-in costs” will assist analysts, investors and other stakeholders of Barrick in understanding the costs associated with producing gold, understanding the economics of gold mining, assessing our operating performance and also our ability to generate free cash flow from current

Reconciliation of Operating Cash Flow to Free Cash Flow


($ millions) 2015 2014 2013 2015 2014

Operating cash flow $ 2,794 $ 2,296 $ 4,239 $ 698 $ 371 Settlement of currency and commodity contracts – – 64 – – Non-recurring tax payments – – 56 – –

Adjusted operating cash flow $ 2,794 $ 2,296 $ 4,359 $ 698 $ 371 Capital expenditures (1,713) (2,432) (5,501) (311) (547)

Free cash flow $ 1,081 $ (136) $ (1,142) $ 387 $ (176)

Free Cash Flow Free cash flow is a measure which excludes capital expenditures from operating cash flow. Management believes this to be a useful indicator of our ability to operate without reliance on additional borrowing or usage of existing cash.

Free cash flow is intended to provide additional information only and does not have any standardized definition under IFRS and should not be considered in

isolation or as a substitute for measures of performance prepared in accordance with IFRS. The measure is not necessarily indicative of operating profit or cash flow from operations as determined under IFRS. Other companies may calculate this measure differently. The following table reconciles this non-GAAP measure to the most directly comparable IFRS measure.



In addition to presenting these metrics on a by-product basis, we have calculated these metrics on a co-product basis. Our co-product metrics remove the impact of other metal sales that are produced as a by-product of our gold production from cost per ounce calculations, but does not reflect a reduction in costs for costs associated with other metal sales.

We believe that C1 cash costs per pound enables investors to better understand the performance of our copper operations in comparison to other copper producers who present results on a similar basis. C1 cash costs per pound excludes royalties and non-routine charges as they are not direct production costs. Starting in this MD&A, we have replaced the non-GAAP measure “C3 fully allocated costs per pound” for our copper mines with “all-in sustaining costs per pound”. Similar to the gold all-in sustaining costs metric, management uses this to better evaluate the costs of copper production. We believe this change will enable investors to better understand the operating performance of our copper mines as this measure reflects all of the sustaining expenditures incurred in order to produce copper. All-in sustaining costs per pound includes C1 cash costs, corporate general and administrative costs, minesite exploration and evaluation costs, royalties, environmental rehabilitation costs and write-downs taken on inventory to net realizable value.

operations and to generate free cash flow on an overall Company basis. Due to the capital intensive nature of the industry and the long useful lives over which these items are depreciated, there can be a significant timing difference between net earnings calculated in accordance with IFRS and the amount of free cash flow that is being generated by a mine. In the current market environment for gold mining equities, many investors and analysts are more focused on the ability of gold mining companies to generate free cash flow from current operations, and consequently we believe these measures are useful non-GAAP operating metrics and supplement our IFRS disclosures. These measures are not representative of all of our cash expenditures as they do not include income tax payments, interest costs or dividend payments. These measures do not include depreciation or amortization.

“All-in sustaining costs” and “all-in costs” are intended to provide additional information only and do not have standardized definitions under IFRS and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for measures of performance prepared in accordance with IFRS. These measures are not equivalent to net income or cash flow from operations as determined under IFRS. Although the WGC has published a standardized definition, other companies may calculate these measures differently.



Reconciliation of Gold Cost of Sales to Cash Costs per ounce, All-in Sustaining Costs per ounce and All-in Costs per ounce


($ millions, except per ounce information in dollars) Reference 2015 2014 2013 2015 2014

Cost of sales A $ 5,897 $ 5,794 $ 6,220 $ 1,573 $ 1,508 Cost of sales applicable to non-controlling interests1 B (620) (514) (387) (174) (132) Cost of sales applicable to ore purchase arrangement – – (46) – – Cost of sales applicable to power sales C (32) (72) (15) (6) (17) Other metal sales D (169) (183) (189) (40) (45) Realized (gains)/losses on hedge and non-hedge E 128 (8) (20) 51 4 Non-recurring items2 (151) – – (90) – Treatment and refinement charges F 14 11 6 4 3

Total production costs $ 5,067 $ 5,028 $ 5,569 $ 1,318 $ 1,321

Depreciation G $(1,441) $ (1,267) $ (1,453) $ (424) $ (332) Impact of Barrick Energy H – – (57) – –

Cash costs $ 3,626 $ 3,761 $ 4,059 $ 894 $ 989

General & administrative costs I 180 299 298 44 81 Rehabilitation – accretion and amortization (operating sites) J 132 123 136 23 29 Mine on-site exploration and evaluation costs K 39 20 61 9 6 Mine development expenditures3 L 549 653 1,101 88 141 Sustaining capital expenditures3 L 522 569 904 142 208

All-in sustaining costs $ 5,048 $ 5,425 $ 6,559 $ 1,200 $ 1,454

Community relations costs not related to current operations M 12 29 23 (1) 19 Rehabilitation – accretion and amortization not related to current operations J 12 11 10 3 3 Exploration and evaluation costs (non-sustaining) K 114 152 117 23 44 Non-sustaining capital expenditures3 Pascua-Lama L (81) 195 1,998 (81) 103 Cortez L 47 19 132 5 5 Goldstrike thiosulfate project L 33 287 223 – 65 Bulyanhulu CIL L (1) 29 83 – 4 Pueblo Viejo L – – 29 – – Hemlo L 39 – – 1 – Arturo L 80 14 – 24 – Other L 16 27 24 2 22

All-in costs $ 5,319 $ 6,188 $ 9,198 $ 1,176 $ 1,719

Ounces sold – consolidated basis (000s ounces) 6,793 6,960 7,604 1,801 1,741 Ounces sold – non-controlling interest (000s ounces)1 (709) (676) (430) (165) (169) Ounces sold – equity basis (000s ounces) 6,083 6,284 7,174 1,636 1,572

Total production costs per ounce4 $ 833 $ 800 $ 776 $ 806 $ 839

Cash costs per ounce4 $ 596 $ 598 $ 566 $ 547 $ 628 Cash costs per ounce (on a co-product basis)4,5 $ 619 $ 618 $ 589 $ 566 $ 648

All-in sustaining costs per ounce4 $ 831 $ 864 $ 915 $ 733 $ 925 All-in sustaining costs per ounce (on a co-product basis)4,5 $ 854 $ 884 $ 938 $ 752 $ 945

All-in costs per ounce4 $ 876 $ 986 $ 1,282 $ 719 $ 1,094 All-in costs per ounce (on a co-product basis)4,5 $ 899 $ 1,006 $ 1,305 $ 738 $ 1,114

1. Relates to interest in Pueblo Viejo and Acacia held by outside shareholders.2. Non-recurring items consist of $10 million of severance costs from the closure of our Golden Sunlight mine, $116 million of costs arising from a change in our

supplies inventory obsolescence provision and inventory impairments at Buzwagi, and $24 million in abnormal costs at Pueblo Viejo and at Veladero. These costs are not indicative of our cost of production and have been excluded from the calculation of cash costs.

3. Amounts represent our share of capital expenditures.4. Total production costs, cash costs, all-in sustaining costs, and all-in costs per ounce may not calculate based on amounts presented in this table due to rounding. 5. Amounts presented on a co-product basis remove the impact of other metal sales (net of non-controlling interest) from cost per ounce calculations that are

produced as a by-product of our gold production.




($ millions, except per ounce information in dollars) 2015 2014 2013 2015 2014

References A Cost of sales – gold Cost of sales (statement of income) $ 6,907 $ 6,830 $ 7,329 $ 1,768 $ 1,799 Less: cost of sales – copper (834) (951) (1,098) (136) (272) Direct mining, royalties and community relations 730 787 926 112 221 Depreciation 104 171 188 24 53 Hedge gains – (7) (16) – (2) Add: Barrick Energy depreciation – – 43 – – Less: cost of sales – non-operating sites – (11) (6) – (4) Less: cost of sales – corporate (176) (74) (48) (59) (15)

Total Cost of Sales – Gold $ 5,897 $ 5,794 $ 6,220 $ 1,573 1,508

B Cost of sales applicable to non-controlling interests Cost of sales applicable to Acacia (Note 5) Direct mining, royalties and community relations $ 694 $ 564 $ 596 $ 259 $ 158 Depreciation 143 129 160 44 35

Total related to Acacia $ 837 $ 693 $ 756 $ 303 $ 193

Portion attributable to non-controlling interest $ 291 $ 225 $ 192 $ 107 $ 66

Cost of sales applicable to Pueblo Viejo (Note 5) Direct mining, royalties and community relations $ 627 $ 642 $ 420 $ 142 $ 156 Depreciation 277 243 139 55 56

Total related to Pueblo Viejo $ 904 $ 885 $ 559 $ 197 $ 212

Portion attributable to non-controlling interest $ 329 $ 289 $ 195 $ 67 $ 66

Cost of sales applicable to non-controlling interests $ 620 $ 514 $ 387 $ 174 $ 132

C Cost of sales applicable to power sales Equal to the cost of sales related to power sales from our Pueblo Viejo mine that are included in consolidated cost of sales but excluded from

cash costs. These figures cannot be tied directly to the financial statements or notes.

D Other metal sales By-product revenues from metals produced in conjunction with gold are deducted from the costs incurred to produce gold (Note 6). By-product

revenues from metals produced net of copper, power revenues and non-controlling interest for the three months and year ended December 31, 2015 were $26 million and $109 million, respectively (2014: $34 million and $137 million, respectively; 2013: $167 million).

E Realized gains/losses on hedge and non-hedge Realized (gains)/losses on non-hedge derivatives $ 22 $ (8) $ (20) $ 11 $ 4 Realized (gains)/losses on hedge derivatives 106 – – 40 –

Realized (gains)/losses on hedge and non-hedge $ 128 $ (8) $ (20) $ 51 $ 4

F Treatment and refinement charges Treatment and refinement charges, which are recorded against concentrate revenues, for the three months and year ended December 31, 2015

were $4 million and $14 million, respectively (2014: $3 million and $11 million, respectively; 2013: $6 million).

G Depreciation – gold Depreciation (Note 7) $ 1,771 $ 1,648 $ 1,732 $ 499 $ 434 Less: copper depreciation (104) (174) (188) (24) (56) Less: NCI portion (168) (135) (90) (37) (31) Add: Barrick Energy – – 43 – – Less: Depreciation – corporate assets (58) (72) (44) (14) (15)

Total depreciation – gold $ 1,441 $ 1,267 $ 1,453 $ 424 $ 332




($ millions, except per ounce information in dollars) 2015 2014 2013 2015 2014

H Impact of Barrick Energy Revenue related to Barrick Energy $ – $ – $ 93 $ – $ – Less: Cost of sales related to Barrick Energy – – (79) – – Add: Barrick Energy depreciation – – 43 – –

Impact of Barrick Energy $ – $ – $ 57 $ – $ –

I General & administrative costs Total general & administrative costs (statement of income) $ 233 $ 385 $ 390 $ 52 $ 102 Less: non-gold and non-operating general & administrative costs (23) (58) (58) (4) (16) Less: NCI portion (15) (16) (10) (3) (5) Add: World Gold Council fees – 3 8 – 1 Less: non-recurring items (15) (15) (32) (1) (1)

Total general & administrative costs $ 180 $ 299 $ 298 $ 44 $ 81

J Rehabilitation – accretion and amortization Includes depreciation (Note 7) on the assets related to rehabilitation provisions of our gold operations of $12 million and $89 million for the

three months and year ended December 31, 2015, respectively (2014: $17 million and $72 million, respectively; 2013: $88 million) and accretion (Note 11) on the rehabilitation provision of our gold operations of $14 million and $55 million for the three months and year ended December 31, 2015, respectively (2014: $15 million and $66 million, respectively; 2013: $61 million).

K Exploration and evaluation costs Exploration and evaluation costs (Note 8) $ 163 $ 184 $ 208 $ 35 $ 54 Less: exploration and evaluation costs – non-gold & NCI (10) (12) (30) (3) (4)

Total exploration and evaluation costs – gold $ 153 $ 172 $ 178 $ 32 $ 50

Exploration & evaluation costs (sustaining) 39 20 61 9 6 Exploration and evaluation costs (non-sustaining) 114 152 117 23 44

Total exploration and evaluation costs – gold $ 153 $ 172 $ 178 $ 32 $ 50

L Capital expenditures Gold segments (Note 5) $ 1,290 $ 1,708 $ 2,558 $ 250 $ 444 Pascua-Lama operating unit (Note 5) (81) 195 2,226 (81) 103 Other gold projects 116 63 177 36 45

Capital expenditures – gold $ 1,325 $ 1,966 $ 4,961 $ 205 $ 592

Less: NCI portion (104) (143) (170) (24) (36) Less: capitalized interest (Note 11) (17) (30) (297) – (8)

Total capital expenditures – gold $ 1,204 $ 1,793 $ 4,494 $ 181 $ 548

Mine development expenditures 549 653 1,101 88 141 Sustaining capital expenditures 522 569 904 142 208 Non-sustaining capital expenditures 133 571 2,489 (49) 199

Total capital expenditures – gold $ 1,204 $ 1,793 $ 4,494 $ 181 $ 548

M Community relations costs Community relations costs (Note 7) $ 62 $ 76 $ 71 $ 13 $ 24 Less: community relations costs relating to current operations (50) (47) (48) (14) (5)

Community relations costs not related to current operations $ 12 $ 29 $ 23 $ (1) $ 19



Reconciliation of Copper Cost of Sales to C1 Cash Costs per pound and All-in Sustaining Costs per pound


($ millions, except per pound information in dollars) 2015 2014 2013 2015 2014

Cost of sales $ 814 $ 954 $ 1,100 $ 116 $ 272 Depreciation/amortization (109) (171) (184) (23) (52) Treatment and refinement charges 178 120 126 49 42 Cost of sales applicable to equity method investments1 23 – – 23 – Less: royalties (101) (39) (48) (16) (14) Non-routine charges – (1) 5 – – Other metal sales (1) (1) (1) – – Other2 72 (27) – 72 –

C1 cash cost of sales $ 876 $ 835 $ 998 $ 221 $ 248

General & administrative costs 21 40 37 4 $ 10 Rehabilitation – accretion and amortization 6 8 11 – 2 Royalties 101 39 48 16 14 Mine on-site exploration and evaluation costs – 1 – – – Mine development expenditures 126 162 170 31 8 Sustaining capital expenditures 51 132 173 13 52 Inventory write-downs – 1 (5) – –

All-in sustaining costs $ 1,181 $ 1,218 $ 1,432 $ 285 $ 334

Pounds sold – consolidated basis (millions pounds) 510 435 519 132 139

C1 cash cost per pound3 $ 1.73 $ 1.92 $ 1.92 $ 1.66 $ 1.78

All-in sustaining costs per pound3 $ 2.33 $ 2.79 $ 2.74 $ 2.15 $ 2.40

1. 2015 figures include $23 million of costs related to our 50% share of Zaldívar due to the divestment of 50% of our interest in the mine on December 1, 2015 and subsequent accounting as an equity method investment.

2. 2015 figures include a $50 million insurance recovery related to the conveyor collapse at Lumwana. 2014 figures include $17 million related to copper cathode purchases and $10 million of abnormal costs related to the conveyor collapse at Lumwana. These costs are not indicative of our normal production costs.

3. C1 cash costs per pound and all-in sustaining costs per pound may not calculate based on amounts presented in this table due to rounding.

EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDAEBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure, which excludes the following from net earnings:n Income tax expense; n Finance costs; n Finance income; and n Depreciation.

Management believes that EBITDA is a valuable indicator of our ability to generate liquidity by producing operating cash flow to: fund working capital needs, service debt obligations, and fund capital expenditures. Management uses EBITDA for this purpose. EBITDA is also frequently used by investors and analysts for valuation purposes whereby EBITDA is multiplied by a factor or “EBITDA multiple” that is based on an observed or inferred relationship between EBITDA and market values to determine the approximate total enterprise value of a company.

Adjusted EBITDA removes the effect of “impairment charges”. These charges are not reflective of our ability to generate liquidity by producing operating cash flow and therefore this adjustment will result in a more meaningful valuation measure for investors and analysts to evaluate our performance in the period and assess our future ability to generate liquidity.

EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA are intended to provide additional information to investors and analysts and do not have any standardized definition under IFRS and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for measures of performance prepared in accordance with IFRS. EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA exclude the impact of cash costs of financing activities and taxes, and the effects of changes in operating working capital balances, and therefore are not necessarily indicative of operating profit or cash flow from operations as determined under IFRS. Other companies may calculate EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA differently.



Reconciliation of Net Earnings to EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA


($ millions, except per share information in dollars) 2015 2014 2013 2015 2014

Net earnings (loss) $ (3,113) $ (2,959) $ (10,603) $ (2,941) $ (3,040) Income tax expense (31) 306 630 (361) (381) Finance costs1 676 721 589 127 180 Finance income (13) (11) (9) (7) (2) Depreciation 1,771 1,648 1,732 499 434

EBITDA $ (710) $ (295) $ (7,661) $ (2,683) $ (2,809) Impairment charges 3,897 4,106 $ 12,687 3,405 3,564

Adjusted EBITDA $ 3,187 $ 3,811 $ 5,026 $ 722 $ 755

Reported as:

Cortez $ 630 $ 648 $ 1,610 $ 257 $ 96 Goldstrike 600 628 693 205 114 Pueblo Viejo 702 912 569 139 197 Lagunas Norte 454 531 602 88 152 Veladero 324 446 522 77 120 Turquoise Ridge 115 156 129 27 30 Porgera 162 164 190 28 31 Kalgoorlie 119 148 182 29 35 Acacia 142 320 275 (33) 73 Zaldívar 154 297 519 23 71 Lumwana 113 138 188 75 72 Other (328) (577) (454) (193) (236) Impairment charges (3,897) (4,106) (12,687) (3,405) (3,564)

EBITDA $ (710) $ (295) $ (7,661) $ (2,683) $ (2,809) Impairment charges 3,897 4,106 $ 12,687 3,405 3,564

Adjusted EBITDA $ 3,187 $ 3,811 $ 5,026 $ 722 $ 755

1. Finance costs exclude accretion.

Realized PriceRealized price is a non-GAAP financial measure which excludes from sales:n Unrealized gains and losses on non-hedge

derivative contracts;n Unrealized mark-to-market gains and losses on

provisional pricing from copper and gold sales contracts;

n Sales attributable to ore purchase arrangements;n Treatment and refining charges; andn Export duties.

This measure is intended to enable Management to better understand the price realized in each reporting period for gold and copper sales because unrealized mark-to-market values of non-hedge gold and copper

derivatives are subject to change each period due to changes in market factors such as market and forward gold and copper prices so that prices ultimately realized may differ from those recorded. The exclusion of such unrealized mark-to-market gains and losses from the presentation of this performance measure enables investors to understand performance based on the realized proceeds of selling gold and copper production.

The gains and losses on non-hedge derivatives and receivable balances relate to instruments/balances that mature in future periods, at which time the gains and losses will become realized. The amounts of these gains and losses reflect fair values based on market valuation assumptions at the end of each period and do not necessarily represent the amounts that will become realized on maturity. We also exclude export duties



that are paid upon sale and netted against revenues as well as treatment and refining charges that are paid to the refiner on gold and copper concentrate sales that are netted against revenues. We believe this provides investors and analysts with a more accurate measure with which to compare to market gold prices and to assess our gold sales performance. For those reasons, management believes that this measure provides a more accurate reflection of our past performance and is a better indicator of its expected performance in future periods.

The realized price measure is intended to provide additional information, and does not have any standardized definition under IFRS and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for measures of performance prepared in accordance with IFRS. The measure is not necessarily indicative of sales as determined under IFRS. Other companies may calculate this measure differently. The following table reconciles realized prices to the most directly comparable IFRS measure.

Reconciliation of Sales to Realized Price per ounce/pound

($ millions, except per ounce/pound information in dollars) Gold Copper

For the years ended December 31 2015 2014 2013 2015 2014 2013

Sales $ 7,813 $ 8,744 $ 10,670 $ 1,002 $ 1,224 $ 1,651 Sales applicable to non-controlling interests (826) (851) (589) – – – Sales attributable to ore purchase agreements – – (46) – – – Sales applicable to equity method investments1 – – – 26 – – Realized non-hedge gold/copper derivative (losses) gains – 1 1 – (11) (22) Treatment and refinement charges 14 11 6 178 120 126 Export duties 34 48 51 – – – Other2 – – – – (17) –

Revenues – as adjusted $ 7,035 $ 7,953 $ 10,093 $ 1,206 $ 1,316 $ 1,755

Ounces/pounds sold (000s ounces/millions pounds) 6,083 6,284 7,174 510 435 519

Realized gold/copper price per ounce/pound3 $ 1,157 $ 1,265 $ 1,407 $ 2.37 $ 3.03 $ 3.39

1. Represents sales applicable to our 50% equity method investment in Zaldívar effective December 1, 2015 and subsequent accounting as an equity method investment.

2. Revenue related to copper cathode purchases made in second quarter 2014.3. Realized price per ounce/pound may not calculate based on amounts presented in this table due to rounding.



Glossary of Technical Terms

ALL-IN SUSTAINING COSTS: A measure of cost per ounce/pound for gold/copper. Refer to page 80 of this MD&A for further information and a reconciliation of the measure.

AUTOCLAVE: Oxidation process in which high temperatures and pressures are applied to convert refractory sulfide mineralization into amenable oxide ore.

BY-PRODUCT: A secondary metal or mineral product recovered in the milling process such as silver.

C1 CASH COSTS: A measure of cost per pound for copper. Refer to page 83 of this MD&A for further information and a reconciliation of the measure.

CASH COSTS: A measure of cost per ounce for gold. Refer to page 80 of this MD&A for further information and a reconciliation of the measure.

CONCENTRATE: A very fine, powder-like product containing the valuable ore mineral from which most of the waste mineral has been eliminated.

CONTAINED OUNCES: Represents ounces in the ground before reduction of ounces not able to be recovered by the applicable metallurgical process.

DEVELOPMENT: Work carried out for the purpose of opening up a mineral deposit. In an underground mine this includes shaft sinking, crosscutting, drifting and raising. In an open pit mine, development includes the removal of overburden.

DILUTION: The effect of waste or low-grade ore which is unavoidably included in the mined ore, lowering the recovered grade.

DORÉ: Unrefined gold and silver bullion bars usually consisting of approximately 90 percent precious metals that will be further refined to almost pure metal.

DRILLING:

Core: drilling with a hollow bit with a diamond cutting rim to produce a cylindrical core that is used for geological study and assays. Used in mineral exploration.In-fill: any method of drilling intervals between existing holes, used to provide greater geological detail and to help establish reserve estimates.

EXPLORATION: Prospecting, sampling, mapping, diamond-drilling and other work involved in searching for ore.

FREE CASH FLOW: A measure that reflects our ability to generate cash flow. Refer to page 78 of this MD&A for a definition.

GRADE: The amount of metal in each tonne of ore, expressed as troy ounces per ton or grams per tonne for precious metals and as a percentage for most other metals.Cut-off grade: the minimum metal grade at which an ore body can be economically mined (used in the calculation of ore reserves).Mill-head grade: metal content of mined ore going into a mill for processing.Recovered grade: actual metal content of ore determined after processing.

Reserve grade: estimated metal content of an ore body, based on reserve calculations.

HEAP LEACHING: A process whereby gold/copper is extracted by “heaping” broken ore on sloping impermeable pads and continually applying to the heaps a weak cyanide solution/sulfuric acid which dissolves the contained gold/copper. The gold/copper-laden solution is then collected for gold/copper recovery.

HEAP LEACH PAD: A large impermeable foundation or pad used as a base for ore during heap leaching.

MERRILL-CROWE PROCESS: A separation technique for removing gold from a cyanide solution.

MILL: A processing facility where ore is finely ground and thereafter undergoes physical or chemical treatment to extract the valuable metals.

MINERAL RESERVE: See pages 87 to 94 – Summary Gold/ Copper Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources.

MINERAL RESOURCE: See pages 87 to 94 – Summary Gold/Copper Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources.

MINING RATE: Tonnes of ore mined per day or even specified time period.

OPEN PIT: A mine where the minerals are mined entirely from the surface.

ORE: Rock, generally containing metallic or non-metallic minerals, which can be mined and processed at a profit.

ORE BODY: A sufficiently large amount of ore that can be mined economically.

OUNCES: Troy ounces of a fineness of 999.9 parts per 1,000 parts.

RECLAMATION: The process by which lands disturbed as a result of mining activity are modified to support beneficial land use. Reclamation activity may include the removal of buildings, equipment, machinery and other physical remnants of mining, closure of tailings storage facilities, leach pads and other mine features, and contouring, covering and re-vegetation of waste rock and other disturbed areas.

RECOVERY RATE: A term used in process metallurgy to indicate the proportion of valuable material physically recovered in the processing of ore. It is generally stated as a percentage of the material recovered compared to the total material originally present.

REFINING: The final stage of metal production in which impurities are removed from the molten metal.

STRIPPING: Removal of overburden or waste rock overlying an ore body in preparation for mining by open pit methods. Expressed as the total number of tonnes mined or to be mined for each ounce of gold or pound of copper.

TAILINGS: The material that remains after all economically and technically recoverable precious metals have been removed from the ore during processing.


MINERAL RESERVES AND MINERAL RESOURCES

Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources

Definitions

A mineral resource is a concentration or occurrence of diamonds, natural solid inorganic material, or natural solid fossilized organic material including base and precious metals, coal, and industrial minerals in or on the Earth’s crust in such form and quantity and of such a grade or quality that it has reasonable prospects for economic extraction. The location, quantity, grade, geological characteristics and continuity of a mineral resource are known, estimated or interpreted from specific geological evidence and knowledge. Mineral resources are sub-divided, in order of increasing geological confidence, into inferred, indicated and measured categories.

An inferred mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality can be estimated on the basis of geological evidence and limited sampling and reasonably assumed, but not verified, geological and grade continuity. The estimate is based on limited information and sampling gathered through appropriate techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits, workings and drill holes.

An indicated mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape and physical characteristics, can be estimated with a level of confidence sufficient to allow the appropriate application of technical and economic parameters, to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. The estimate is based on detailed and reliable exploration and testing information gathered through appropriate techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits, workings and drill holes that are spaced closely enough for geological and grade continuity to be reasonably assumed.

A measured mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape and physical characteristics are so well established that they can be estimated with confidence

sufficient to allow the appropriate application of technical and economic parameters, to support production planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. The estimate is based on detailed and reliable exploration, sampling and testing information gathered through appropriate techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits, workings and drill holes that are spaced closely enough to confirm both geological and grade continuity.

Mineral resources, which are not mineral reserves, do not have demonstrated economic viability.

A mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of a measured or indicated mineral resource demonstrated by at least a preliminary feasibility study. This study must include adequate information on mining, processing, metallurgical, economic and other relevant factors that demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that economic extraction can be justified.

A mineral reserve includes diluting materials and allowances for losses that may occur when the material is mined. Mineral reserves are sub-divided in order of increasing confidence into probable mineral reserves and proven mineral reserves. A probable mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of an indicated and, in some circumstances, a measured mineral resource demonstrated by at least a preliminary feasibility study. This study must include adequate information on mining, processing, metallurgical, economic and other relevant factors that demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that economic extraction can be justified.

A proven mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of a measured mineral resource demonstrated by at least a preliminary feasibility study. This study must include adequate information on mining, processing, metallurgical, economic and other relevant factors that demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that economic extraction is justified.

The tables on the next seven pages set forth Barrick’s interest in the total proven and probable gold and copper reserves and in the total measured, indicated and inferred gold, copper and nickel resources and certain related information at each property. For further details of proven and probable mineral reserves and measured, indicated and inferred mineral resources by category, metal and property, see pages 88 to 94.

The Company has carefully prepared and verified the mineral reserve and mineral resource figures and believes that its method of estimating mineral reserves has been verified by mining experience. These figures are estimates, however, and no assurance can be given that the indicated quantities of metal will be produced. Metal price fluctuations may render mineral reserves containing relatively lower grades of mineralization uneconomic. Moreover, short-term operating factors relating to the mineral reserves, such as the need for orderly development of ore bodies or the processing of new or different ore grades, could affect the Company’s profitability in any particular accounting period.



Gold Mineral Reserves1

As at December 31, 2015 Proven Probable Total

Contained Contained Contained Tonnes Grade ounces Tonnes Grade ounces Tonnes Grade ounces Based on attributable ounces (000s) (gm/t) (000s) (000s) (gm/t) (000s) (000s) (gm/t) (000s)

North America Goldstrike Open Pit 57,874 2.92 5,440 11,199 4.09 1,471 69,073 3.11 6,911 Goldstrike Underground 2,789 11.34 1,017 2,163 8.79 611 4,952 10.23 1,628 Goldstrike Property Total 60,663 3.31 6,457 13,362 4.85 2,082 74,025 3.59 8,539 Pueblo Viejo (60.00%) 55,526 2.97 5,295 38,351 2.97 3,665 93,877 2.97 8,960 Cortez 14,393 2.24 1,037 138,839 2.26 10,092 153,232 2.26 11,129 Bald Mountain2 13,525 0.98 426 35,558 0.63 716 49,083 0.72 1,142 Turquoise Ridge (75.00%) 4,433 15.80 2,252 4,131 14.77 1,962 8,564 15.30 4,214 Round Mountain (50.00%)2 19,531 0.72 454 13,541 0.65 282 33,072 0.69 736 South Arturo (60.00%) 304 6.86 67 985 5.24 166 1,289 5.62 233 Hemlo 1,016 2.76 90 12,175 2.11 827 13,191 2.16 917 Golden Sunlight 492 1.26 20 562 2.99 54 1,054 2.18 74

South America Cerro Casale (75.00%) 172,276 0.65 3,586 725,926 0.59 13,848 898,202 0.60 17,434 Pascua-Lama 31,934 1.84 1,887 292,692 1.43 13,497 324,626 1.47 15,384 Veladero 24,821 0.78 622 252,112 0.85 6,922 276,933 0.85 7,544 Lagunas Norte 23,444 1.54 1,164 40,197 1.98 2,565 63,641 1.82 3,729 Australia Pacific Porgera (47.50%)3 1,028 9.08 300 13,443 3.87 1,671 14,471 4.24 1,971 Kalgoorlie (50.00%) 69,886 0.96 2,153 30,952 2.01 2,001 100,838 1.28 4,154 Africa Bulyanhulu (63.90%) 889 10.25 293 16,599 6.82 3,637 17,488 6.99 3,930 North Mara (63.90%) 3,277 2.00 211 11,408 2.87 1,051 14,685 2.67 1,262 Buzwagi (63.90%) 5,225 0.97 163 4,157 1.77 236 9,382 1.32 399 Other 163 0.38 2 12,333 0.26 105 12,496 0.27 107

Total 502,826 1.64 26,479 1,657,323 1.23 65,379 2,160,149 1.32 91,858

Copper Mineral Reserves1

As at December 31, 2015 Proven Probable Total

Contained Contained Contained Tonnes Grade lbs Tonnes Grade lbs Tonnes Grade lbs Based on attributable pounds (000s) (%) (millions) (000s) (%) (millions) (000s) (%) (millions)

Zaldívar (50.00%)4 187,066 0.553 2,281.3 40,596 0.532 475.7 227,662 0.549 2,757.0 Lumwana 147,015 0.542 1,755.8 99,657 0.598 1,313.0 246,672 0.564 3,068.8 Jabal Sayid (50.00%) 163 2.171 7.8 12,333 2.539 690.3 12,496 2.534 698.1

Total 334,244 0.5494,044.9 152,586 0.7372,479.0 486,830 0.6086,523.9

1. See accompanying footnote #1.2. See accompanying footnote #2.3. See accompanying footnote #3.4. See accompanying footnote #4.



Gold Mineral Resources1,2

As at December 31, 2015 Measured (M) Indicated (I) (M) + (I) Inferred

Contained Contained Contained Contained Tonnes Grade ounces Tonnes Grade ounces ounces Tonnes Grade ounces Based on attributable ounces (000s) (gm/t) (000s) (000s) (gm/t) (000s) (000s) (000s) (gm/t) (000s)

North America Goldstrike Open Pit 800 3.27 84 4,316 2.31 320 404 458 2.78 41 Goldstrike Underground 1,402 12.73 574 2,705 9.29 808 1,382 1,236 10.29 409 Goldstrike Property Total 2,202 9.29 658 7,021 5.00 1,128 1,786 1,694 8.26 450 Pueblo Viejo (60.00%) 6,738 2.51 544 91,143 2.45 7,187 7,731 2,333 1.96 147 Cortez 3,429 1.64 181 40,280 1.52 1,969 2,150 18,779 1.43 861 Goldrush 132 11.31 48 25,034 10.57 8,509 8,557 5,695 9.00 1,647 Bald Mountain3 34,286 0.83 916 138,186 0.63 2,782 3,698 21,348 0.50 345 Turquoise Ridge (75.00%) 15,753 6.30 3,193 59,236 4.32 8,233 11,426 23,965 5.03 3,872 Round Mountain (50.00%)3 7,312 0.55 129 13,767 0.48 213 342 8,103 0.45 117 South Arturo (60.00%) 34 1.83 2 124 1.25 5 7 13 2.39 1 Hemlo 246 3.41 27 42,500 1.04 1,424 1,451 3,160 3.01 306 Golden Sunlight 810 1.54 40 13,996 1.45 651 691 4,176 1.30 175 Donlin Gold (50.00%) 3,865 2.52 313 266,803 2.24 19,190 19,503 46,108 2.02 2,997

South America Cerro Casale (75.00%) 17,217 0.30 167 205,268 0.36 2,362 2,529 371,580 0.38 4,493 Pascua-Lama 14,772 1.49 710 142,693 1.25 5,749 6,459 19,486 1.56 975 Veladero 4,119 0.40 53 71,109 0.54 1,234 1,287 5,633 0.45 82 Lagunas Norte 2,092 1.37 92 35,461 1.36 1,552 1,644 1,692 0.88 48 Alturas – – – – – – – 136,384 1.25 5,501

Australia Pacific Porgera (47.50%)4 146 6.60 31 9,298 5.45 1,629 1,660 8,476 3.65 994 Kalgoorlie (50.00%) 5,024 1.16 188 10,426 0.75 251 439 142 2.85 13

Africa Bulyanhulu (63.90%) 41 6.07 8 14,118 7.03 3,193 3,201 12,716 9.23 3,772 North Mara (63.90%) 1,686 2.42 131 6,413 2.72 561 692 3,162 4.60 468 Buzwagi (63.90%) 121 1.54 6 28,092 1.35 1,215 1,221 2,336 1.34 101 Nyanzaga (63.90%) – – – 62,208 1.31 2,621 2,621 1,944 0.93 58

Other – – – 19 – – – 246 0.25 2

Total 120,025 1.93 7,4371,283,195 1.74 71,658 79,095 699,171 1.22 27,425

Copper Mineral Resources1,2

As at December 31, 2015 Measured (M) Indicated (I) (M) + (I) Inferred

Contained Contained Contained Contained Tonnes Grade lbs Tonnes Grade lbs lbs Tonnes Grade lbs Based on attributable pounds (000s) (%) (millions) (000s) (%) (millions) (millions) (000s) (%) (millions)

Zaldívar (50.00%)5 45,490 0.431 432.5 14,975 0.432 142.6 575.1 3,012 0.608 40.4 Lumwana 105,065 0.478 1,107.7 573,056 0.527 6,663.0 7,770.7 232 0.430 2.2 Jabal Sayid (50.00%) – – 19 1.432 0.6 0.6 246 2.747 14.9

Total 150,555 0.464 1,540.2 588,050 0.525 6,806.2 8,346.4 3,490 0.747 57.5

1. Resources which are not reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.2. See accompanying footnote #1.3. See accompanying footnote #2.4. See accompanying footnote #3.5. See accompanying footnote #4.



Summary Gold Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources1,2,3

For the years ended December 31 2015 2014

Tonnes Grade Ounces Tonnes Grade Ounces Based on attributable ounces (000s) (gm/t) (000s) (000s) (gm/t) (000s)

North America Goldstrike Open Pit (proven and probable) 69,073 3.11 6,911 74,192 3.24 7,724 (mineral resource) 5,116 2.46 404 4,496 1.90 274 Goldstrike Underground (proven and probable) 4,952 10.23 1,628 6,661 8.83 1,890 (mineral resource) 4,107 10.47 1,382 3,740 11.60 1,395 Goldstrike Property Total (proven and probable) 74,025 3.59 8,539 80,853 3.70 9,614 (mineral resource) 9,223 6.02 1,786 8,236 6.30 1,669 Pueblo Viejo (60.00%) (proven and probable) 93,877 2.97 8,960 87,522 3.31 9,318 (mineral resource) 97,881 2.46 7,731 74,748 2.62 6,301 Cortez (proven and probable) 153,232 2.26 11,129 153,821 1.99 9,851 (mineral resource) 43,709 1.53 2,150 38,925 2.81 3,513 Goldrush (proven and probable) – – – – – – (mineral resource) 25,166 10.58 8,557 68,122 4.83 10,574 Bald Mountain4 (proven and probable) 49,083 0.72 1,142 60,477 0.70 1,361 (mineral resource) 172,472 0.67 3,698 206,947 0.63 4,160 Turquoise Ridge (75.00%) (proven and probable) 8,564 15.30 4,214 8,199 16.91 4,458 (mineral resource) 74,989 4.74 11,426 81,206 4.64 12,111 Round Mountain (50.00%)4 (proven and probable) 33,072 0.69 736 27,299 0.79 690 (mineral resource) 21,079 0.50 342 23,766 0.58 440 South Arturo (60.00%) (proven and probable) 1,289 5.62 233 1,711 4.40 242 (mineral resource) 158 1.38 7 32,420 1.46 1,525 Ruby Hill (0.00%)5 (proven and probable) – – – 1,566 0.48 24 (mineral resource) – – – 188,345 0.65 3,923 Hemlo (proven and probable) 13,191 2.16 917 12,267 2.08 820 (mineral resource) 42,746 1.06 1,451 36,930 1.41 1,671 Spring Valley (0.00%)5 (proven and probable) – – – – – – (mineral resource) – – – 62,369 0.66 1,326 Golden Sunlight (proven and probable) 1,054 2.18 74 2,281 1.73 127 (mineral resource) 14,806 1.45 691 5,610 1.56 281 Donlin Gold (50.00%) (proven and probable) – – – – – – (mineral resource) 270,668 2.24 19,503 270,668 2.24 19,503

South America Cerro Casale (75.00%) (proven and probable) 898,202 0.60 17,434 898,202 0.60 17,434 (mineral resource) 222,485 0.35 2,529 222,485 0.35 2,529 Pascua-Lama (proven and probable) 324,626 1.47 15,384 324,626 1.47 15,384 (mineral resource) 157,465 1.28 6,459 157,465 1.28 6,459 Veladero (proven and probable) 276,933 0.85 7,544 172,003 0.86 4,737 (mineral resource) 75,228 0.53 1,287 171,971 0.70 3,872 Lagunas Norte (proven and probable) 63,641 1.82 3,729 69,650 1.27 2,833 (mineral resource) 37,553 1.36 1,644 19,383 0.69 429

1. Resources which are not reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.2. See accompanying footnote #1.3. Measured plus indicated resources.4. See accompanying footnote #2.5. See accompanying footnote #5.



Summary Gold Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources1,2,3


Tonnes Grade Ounces Tonnes Grade Ounces Based on attributable ounces (000s) (gm/t) (000s) (000s) (gm/t) (000s)

Australia Pacific Porgera (47.50%)4 (proven and probable) 14,471 4.24 1,971 17,049 5.49 3,008 (mineral resource) 9,444 5.47 1,660 34,256 3.68 4,050 Kalgoorlie (50.00%) (proven and probable) 100,838 1.28 4,154 89,067 1.22 3,482 (mineral resource) 15,450 0.88 439 23,634 1.51 1,146 Cowal (0.00%)5 (proven and probable) – – – 41,470 1.17 1,555 (mineral resource) – – – 48,915 1.09 1,708

Africa Bulyanhulu (63.90%) (proven and probable) 17,488 6.99 3,930 24,769 7.65 6,090 (mineral resource) 14,159 7.03 3,201 7,923 8.49 2,163 North Mara (63.90%) (proven and probable) 14,685 2.67 1,262 15,114 2.69 1,308 (mineral resource) 8,099 2.66 692 11,477 2.87 1,060 Buzwagi (63.90%) (proven and probable) 9,382 1.32 399 13,267 1.35 574 (mineral resource) 28,213 1.35 1,221 30,885 1.30 1,289 Nyanzaga (63.90%) (proven and probable) – – – – – – (mineral resource) 62,208 1.31 2,621 62,208 1.31 2,621

Other (proven and probable) 12,496 0.27 107 12,422 0.27 107 (mineral resource) 19 – – 239 0.13 1

Total (proven and probable) 2,160,149 1.32 91,858 2,113,635 1.37 93,017 (mineral resource) 1,403,220 1.75 79,095 1,889,133 1.55 94,324

1. Resources which are not reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.2. See accompanying footnote #1.3. Measured plus indicated resources.4. See accompanying footnote #3.5. See accompanying footnote #6.



Contained Silver Within Reported Gold Reserves1

For the year ended In proven In probable December 31, 2015 gold reserves gold reserves Total

Contained Contained Contained Process Tonnes Grade ounces Tonnes Grade ounces Tonnes Grade ounces recovery Based on attributable ounces (000s) (gm/t) (000s) (000s) (gm/t) (000s) (000s) (gm/t) (000s) %

North America Pueblo Viejo (60.00%) 55,526 18.703 33,388 38,351 16.83 20,757 93,877 17.94 54,145 52.6% South America Cerro Casale (75.00%) 172,276 1.907 10,565 725,926 1.43 33,451 898,202 1.52 44,016 69.0% Pascua-Lama 31,934 69.840 71,705 292,692 64.09 603,137 324,626 64.66 674,842 81.7% Lagunas Norte 18,574 3.574 2,134 40,197 5.91 7,634 58,771 5.17 9,768 28.2% Veladero 16,276 12.550 6,567 252,112 14.47 117,257 268,388 14.35 123,824 10.1%

Africa Bulyanhulu (63.90%) 870 6.54 183 12,415 7.71 3,078 13,285 7.63 3,261 65.0%

Total 295,456 13.11124,542 1,361,693 17.94 785,314 1,657,149 17.08 909,856 69.0%

1. Silver is accounted for as a by-product credit against reported or projected gold production costs.

Contained Copper Within Reported Gold Reserves1

For the year ended In proven In probable December 31, 2015 gold reserves gold reserves Total

Contained Contained Contained Process Tonnes Grade lbs Tonnes Grade lbs Tonnes Grade lbs recovery Based on attributable pounds (000s) (%) (millions) (000s) (%) (millions) (000s) (%) (millions) %

North America Pueblo Viejo (60.00%) 55,526 0.087 106.5 38,351 0.105 89.1 93,877 0.095 195.6 27.7%

South America Cerro Casale (75.00%) 172,276 0.190 721.3 725,926 0.226 3,613.3 898,202 0.219 4,334.6 87.4%

Pascua-Lama 31,934 0.094 66.1 292,692 0.069 447.8 324,626 0.072 513.9 38.5%

Africa Bulyanhulu (63.90%) 870 0.417 8.0 12,415 0.539 147.6 13,285 0.531 155.6 90.0%

Buzwagi (63.90%) 5,225 0.070 8.1 4,157 0.137 12.6 9,382 0.100 20.7 64.7%

Total 265,831 0.155 910.0 1,073,541 0.182 4,310.4 1,339,372 0.177 5,220.4 80.4%

1. Copper is accounted for as a by-product credit against reported or projected gold production costs.



Contained Silver Within Reported Gold Resources1

For the year ended December 31, 2015 Measured (M) Indicated (I) (M) + (I) Inferred

Contained Contained Contained Tonnes Grade ounces Tonnes Grade ounces Ounces Tonnes Grade ounces Based on attributable ounces (000s) (gm/t) (000s) (000s) (gm/t) (000s) (000s) (000s) (gm/t) (000s)

North America Pueblo Viejo (60.00%) 6,738 16.05 3,478 91,143 14.05 41,172 44,650 2,333 13.93 1,045

South America Cerro Casale (75.00%) 17,217 1.19 661 205,268 1.06 6,985 7,646 371,580 1.04 12,379

Pascua-Lama 14,772 26.37 12,525 142,658 22.28 102,178 114,703 19,476 20.13 12,607

Lagunas Norte 2,092 3.82 257 35,461 3.74 4,267 4,524 6,774 0.93 203

Veladero 4,119 6.52 863 71,109 11.67 26,675 27,538 5,633 10.14 1,836

Africa Bulyanhulu (63.90%) 41 5.31 7 14,118 5.92 2,689 2,696 12,716 6.31 2,580

Total 44,979 12.30 17,791 559,757 10.22183,966 201,757418,512 2.28 30,650

1. Resources which are not reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.

Contained Copper Within Reported Gold Resources1

For the year ended December 31, 2015 In measured (M) In indicated (I) gold resources gold resources (M) + (I) Inferred


North America Pueblo Viejo (60.00%) 6,738 0.083 12.3 91,143 0.083 166.1 178.4 2,333 0.041 2.1

South America Cerro Casale (75.00%) 17,217 0.132 50.1 205,268 0.164 743.8 793.9 371,580 0.192 1,570.2

Pascua-Lama 14,772 0.072 23.5 142,693 0.061 193.4 216.9 19,486 0.040 17.3

Africa Buzwagi (63.90%) 121 0.150 0.4 28,092 0.127 78.6 79.0 2,336 0.136 7.0

Total 38,848 0.101 86.3 467,196 0.115 1,181.9 1,268.2 395,735 0.183 1,596.6


Nickel Mineral Resources1

For the year ended December 31, 2015 Measured (M) Indicated (I) (M) + (I) Inferred


Africa Kabanga (50.00%) 6,905 2.490 379.0 11,705 2.720 701.9 1,080.9 10,400 2.600 596.1




Mineral Reserves and Resources Notes

1. Mineral reserves (“reserves”) and mineral resources (“resources”) have been estimated as at December 31, 2015 in accordance with National Instrument 43-101 as required by Canadian securities regulatory authorities. For United States reporting purposes, Industry Guide 7 under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (as interpreted by Staff of the SEC), applies different standards in order to classify mineralization as a reserve. Accordingly, for U.S. reporting purposes, approximately 1.70 million ounces of proven and probable gold reserves at Cortez and approximately 2.11 million ounces of proven and probable gold reserves at Lagunas Norte are classified as mineralized material. In addition, while the terms “measured”, “indicated” and “inferred” mineral resources are required pursuant to National Instrument 43-101, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission does not recognize such terms. Canadian standards differ significantly from the requirements of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, and mineral resource information contained herein is not comparable to similar information regarding mineral reserves disclosed in accordance with the requirements of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. U.S. investors should understand that “inferred” mineral resources have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence and great uncertainty as to their economic and legal feasibility. In addition, U.S. investors are cautioned not to assume that any part or all of Barrick’s mineral resources constitute or will be converted into reserves. Calculations have been prepared by employees of Barrick, its joint venture partners or its joint venture operating companies, as applicable, under the supervision of Rick Sims, Senior Director, Resources and Reserves, of Barrick, Steven Haggarty, Senior Director, Metallurgy, of Barrick and Patrick Garretson, Director, Life of Mine Planning, of Barrick. Except as noted below, reserves have been estimated based on an assumed gold price of US$1,000 per ounce for 2016 through 2020 and US$1,200 per ounce from 2021 onwards, an assumed silver price of US$15.00 per ounce for 2016 through 2020 and US$16.50 from 2021 onwards, and an assumed copper price of US$2.75 per pound for 2016 through 2020 and US$3.00 per pound from 2021 onwards (for more information about Barrick’s two-tiered approach to estimating reserves, see page 26 of the Annual Report 2015) and long-term average exchange rates of 1.31 CAD/US$ and 0.72 US$/AUD. Reserves at Round Mountain have been estimated using an assumed long-term average gold price of US$1,200. Reserves at Kalgoorlie assumed a gold price of AUD$1,400 and Bulyanhulu, North Mara and Buzwagi assumed a gold price of US$1,100. Reserve estimates incorporate current and/or expected mine plans and cost levels at each property. Varying cut-off grades have been used depending on the mine and type of ore contained in the reserves. Barrick’s normal data verification procedures have been employed in connection with the calculations. Verification procedures include industry-standard quality control practices. Resources as at December 31, 2015 have been estimated using varying cut-off grades, depending on both the type of mine or project, its maturity and ore types at each property. For a breakdown of reserves and resources by category and for a more detailed description of the key assumptions, parameters, and methods used in estimating Barrick’s reserves and resources, see Barrick’s most recent Annual Information Form/Form 40-F on file with Canadian provincial securities regulatory authorities and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

2. On January 11, 2016, the Company divested the Bald Mountain mine and its interest in the Round Mountain mine. For additional information regarding this matter, see page 27 of Barrick’s Annual Report 2015.

3. On August 31, 2015, the Company divested 50% of its interest in the Porgera mine. For additional information regarding this matter, see page 27 of Barrick’s Annual Report 2015.

4. On December 1, 2015, the Company divested 50% of its interest in the Zaldívar mine. For additional information regarding this matter, see page 27 of Barrick’s Annual Report 2015.

5. On December 17, 2015, the Company divested the Ruby Hill mine and its interest in the Spring Valley project. For additional information regarding this matter, see page 27 of Barrick’s Annual Report 2015.

6. On July 23, 2015, the Company divested the Cowal mine. For additional information regarding this matter, see page 27 of Barrick’s Annual Report 2015.

MANAGEMENT’S RESPONSIBILITY


Management’s Responsibility

Management’s Responsibility for Financial Statements

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared by and are the responsibility of the Board of Directors and Management of the Company.

The consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board and reflect Management’s best estimates and judgments based on currently available information. The Company has developed and maintains a system of internal controls in order to ensure, on a reasonable and cost effective basis, the reliability of its financial information.

The consolidated financial statements have been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Chartered Accountants. Their report outlines the scope of their examination and opinion on the consolidated financial statements.

Shaun A. UsmarSenior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerToronto, CanadaFebruary 17, 2016


MANAGEMENT’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING

Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

Barrick’s management is responsible for establishing and maintaining internal control over financial reporting.Barrick’s management assessed the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as at

December 31, 2015. Barrick’s Management used the Internal Control – Integrated Framework (2013) as issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (COSO) of the Treadway Commission to evaluate the effectiveness of Barrick’s internal control over financial reporting. Based on management’s assessment, Barrick’s internal control over financial reporting is effective as at December 31, 2015.

The effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as at December 31, 2015 has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Chartered Accountants, as stated in their report which is located on pages 97 – 98 of Barrick’s 2015 Annual Financial Statements.

INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT


Independent Auditor’s Report

February 17, 2016

To the Shareholders of Barrick Gold CorporationWe have completed integrated audits of Barrick Gold Corporation’s (the company) 2015 and 2014 consolidated financial statements and its internal control over financial reporting as at December 31, 2015. Our opinions, based on our audits, are presented below.

Report on the consolidated financial statementsWe have audited the accompanying consolidated financial statements of Barrick Gold Corporation, which comprise the consolidated balance sheets as at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014 and the consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, cash flow and changes in equity for the years then ended, and the related notes, which comprise a summary of significant accounting policies and other explanatory information.

Management’s responsibility for the consolidated financial statementsManagement is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these consolidated financial statements in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) and for such internal control as management determines is necessary to enable the preparation of consolidated financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.

Auditor’s responsibilityOur responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards and the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free from material misstatement. Canadian generally accepted auditing standards also require that we comply with ethical requirements.

An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence, on a test basis, about the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor’s judgement, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the consolidated financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the company’s preparation and fair presentation of the consolidated financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting principles and policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the consolidated financial statements.

We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained in our audits is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinion on the consolidated financial statements.

OpinionIn our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Barrick Gold Corporation as at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014 and its financial performance and its cash flows for the years then ended in accordance with IFRS as issued by the IASB.

Independent Auditor’s Report


Emphasis of matterAs discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements, on January 1, 2015, Barrick Gold Corporation adopted International Financial Reporting Standard 9, Financial Instruments. Our opinion is not modified with respect to this matter.

Report on internal control over financial reportingWe have also audited Barrick Gold Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as atDecember 31, 2015, based on criteria established in Internal Control − Integrated Framework (2013), issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).

Management’s responsibility for internal control over financial reportingManagement is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting.

Auditor’s responsibilityOur responsibility is to express an opinion on the company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit. We conducted our audit of internal control over financial reporting in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects.

An audit of internal control over financial reporting includes obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control, based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we consider necessary in the circumstances.

We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our audit opinion on the company’s internal control over financial reporting.

Definition of internal control over financial reportingA company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that: (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Inherent limitationsBecause of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

OpinionIn our opinion, Barrick Gold Corporation maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as at December 31, 2015, based on criteria established in Internal Control − Integrated Framework (2013) issued by COSO.

Chartered Professional Accountants, Licensed Public Accountants Toronto, Canada

INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


Consolidated Statements of IncomeBarrick Gold Corporation For the years ended December 31 (in millions of United States dollars, except per share data) 2015 2014

Revenue (notes 5 and 6) $ 9,029 $ 10,239

Costs and expenses Cost of sales (notes 5 and 7) 6,907 6,830 General and administrative expenses (note 10) 233 385 Exploration, evaluation and project expenses (notes 5 and 8) 355 392 Impairment charges (note 9b) 3,897 4,106 Loss on currency translation 120 132 Closed mine rehabilitation 3 83 Loss from equity investees (note 15) 7 –

Loss on non-hedge derivatives (note 24e) 38 193 Other expense (income) (note 9a) (113) (14)

Loss before finance items and income taxes (2,418) (1,868) Finance items Finance income 13 11 Finance costs (note 13) (739) (796)

Loss before income taxes (3,144) (2,653) Income tax recovery (expense) (note 11) 31 (306)

Net loss $ (3,113) $ (2,959)

Attributable to: Equity holders of Barrick Gold Corporation $ (2,838) $ (2,907) Non-controlling interests (note 31) $ (275) $ (52)

Earnings per share data attributable to the equity holders of Barrick Gold Corporation (note 12) Net loss Basic $ (2.44) $ (2.50) Diluted $ (2.44) $ (2.50)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.



Consolidated Statementsof Comprehensive IncomeBarrick Gold Corporation For the years ended December 31 (in millions of United States dollars) 2015 2014

Net loss $ (3,113) $ (2,959) Other comprehensive income (loss), net of taxes Movement in equity investments fair value reserve: Net unrealized changes on equity investments, net of tax $nil and $nil (11) 18 Net realized changes on equity investments, net of tax $nil and $nil 18 – Impairment losses on equity investments, net of tax $nil and $nil – 18 Items that may be reclassified subsequently to profit or loss: Unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives designated as cash flow hedges, net of tax $43 and $6 (134) (35) Realized (gains) losses on derivatives designated as cash flow hedges, net of tax ($20) and ($1) 111 (88) Actuarial gain (loss) on post-employment benefit obligations, net of tax ($3) and $10 5 (19) Currency translation adjustments, net of tax $nil and $nil (56) (43)

Total other comprehensive loss (67) (149)

Total comprehensive loss $ (3,180) $ (3,108)

Attributable to: Equity holders of Barrick Gold Corporation $ (2,905) $ (3,056)

Non-controlling interests $ (275) $ (52)




Consolidated Statements of Cash FlowBarrick Gold Corporation For the years ended December 31 (in millions of United States dollars) 2015 2014

Operating Activities Net loss $(3,113) $ (2,959) Adjustments for the following items: Depreciation 1,771 1,648 Finance costs (note 13) 739 796 Impairment charges (note 9b) 3,897 4,106 Income tax (recovery) expense (note 11) (31) 306 (Increase) decrease in inventory 24 (78) Loss on non-hedge derivatives (note 24e) 38 193 Gain on sale of non-current assets/investments (187) (52) Deposit on gold and silver streaming agreement (note 28) 610 – Other operating activities (note 14a) 15 (442)

Operating cash flows before interest and income taxes 3,763 3,518 Interest paid (677) (707) Income taxes paid (292) (515)

Net cash provided by operating activities 2,794 2,296

Investing Activities Property, plant and equipment Capital expenditures (note 5) (1,713) (2,432) Sales proceeds 43 72 Proceeds from joint venture agreement of Jabal Sayid (note 4e) – 216 Divestitures (note 4) 1,904 166 Investment sales 33 120 Other investing activities (note 14b) (17) (92)

Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities 250 (1,950)

Financing Activities Proceeds from divestment of 10% of issued ordinary share capital of Acacia (note 4g) – 186 Debt (note 24b) Proceeds 9 141 Repayments (3,142) (188) Dividends (note 30) (160) (232) Funding from non-controlling interests (note 31) 40 24 Disbursements to non-controlling interests (note 31) (90) – Other financing activities (note 14c) 68 9

Net cash used in financing activities (3,275) (60)

Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and equivalents (13) (11)

Net increase (decrease) in cash and equivalents (244) 275 Cash and equivalents at beginning of year (note 24a) 2,699 2,404 Add: cash and equivalents of assets classified as held-for-sale at the beginning of year – 20

Cash and equivalents at the end of year $ 2,455 $ 2,699

Less: cash and equivalents of assets classified as held-for-sale at the end of year (note 4) – –

Cash and equivalents excluding assets classified as held-for-sale at the end of year (note 24a) $ 2,455 $ 2,699




Consolidated Balance Sheets As at As at Barrick Gold Corporation December 31, December 31, (in millions of United States dollars) 2015 2014 Assets Current assets Cash and equivalents (note 24a) $ 2,455 $ 2,699 Accounts receivable (note 17) 275 418 Inventories (note 16) 1,717 2,722 Other current assets (note 17) 263 311

Total current assets (excluding assets classified as held-for-sale) 4,710 6,150 Assets classified as held-for-sale (note 4) 758 –

Total current assets 5,468 6,150

Non-current assets Equity in investees (note 15) 1,199 206 Property, plant and equipment (note 18) 14,434 19,193 Goodwill (note 19a) 1,371 4,426 Intangible assets (note 19b) 271 308 Deferred income tax assets (note 29) 1,040 674 Non-current portion of inventory (note 16) 1,502 1,684 Other assets (note 21) 1,023 1,238

Total assets $26,308 $ 33,879

Liabilities and Equity Current liabilities Accounts payable (note 22) $ 1,158 $ 1,653 Debt (note 24b) 203 333 Current income tax liabilities – 84 Other current liabilities (note 23) 337 417

Total current liabilities (excluding liabilities classified as held-for-sale) 1,698 2,487 Liabilities classified as held-for-sale (note 4) 149 –

Total current liabilities 1,847 2,487

Non-current liabilities Debt (note 24b) 9,765 12,748 Provisions (note 26) 2,102 2,561 Deferred income tax liabilities (note 29) 1,553 2,036 Other liabilities (note 28) 1,586 1,185

Total liabilities 16,853 21,017

Equity Capital stock (note 30) 20,869 20,864 Deficit (13,642) (10,739) Accumulated other comprehensive loss (370) (199) Other 321 321

Total equity attributable to Barrick Gold Corporation shareholders 7,178 10,247 Non-controlling interests (note 31) 2,277 2,615

Total equity 9,455 12,862

Contingencies and commitments (notes 2, 16, 18 and 35)

Total liabilities and equity $26,308 $ 33,879


Signed on behalf of the Board,

John L. Thornton, Chairman Steven J. Shapiro, Director



Consolidated Statementsof Changes in Equity Attributable to equity holders of the Company

Accumulated Retained other Total equity Non- Barrick Gold Corporation Common Shares earnings comprehensive attributable to controlling Total(in millions of United States dollars) (in thousands) Capital stock (deficit) income (loss)1 Other2 shareholders interests equity

At January 1, 2015 1,164,670 $ 20,864 $ (10,739) $ (199) $ 321 $ 10,247 $ 2,615 $ 12,862

Impact of adopting IFRS 9 on January 1, 2015 (note 24) – – 99 (99) – – – –

At January 1, 2015 (restated) 1,164,670 $ 20,864 $ (10,640) $ (298) $ 321 $ 10,247 $ 2,615 $ 12,862

Net loss – – (2,838) – – (2,838) (275) (3,113) Total other comprehensive income (loss) – – 5 (72) – (67) – (67)

Total comprehensive loss – $ – $ (2,833) $ (72) $ – $ (2,905) $ (275) $ (3,180)

Transactions with owners Dividends – – (160) – – (160) – (160) Dividend reinvestment plan 411 3 (3) – – – – – Recognition of stock option expense – 2 – – – 2 – 2 Funding from non-controlling interests – – – – – – 41 41 Other decrease in non-controlling interests – – – – – – (104) (104) Other decreases – – (6) – – (6) – (6)

Total transactions with owners 411 $ 5 $ (169) $ – $ – $ (164) $ (63) $ (227)

At December 31, 2015 1,165,081 $ 20,869 $ (13,642) $ (370) $ 321 $ 7,178 $ 2,277 $ 9,455

At January 1, 2014 1,164,652 $ 20,869 $ (7,581) $ (69) $ 314 $ 13,533 $ 2,468 $ 16,001

Net loss – – (2,907) – – (2,907) (52) (2,959) Total other comprehensive loss – – (19) (130) – (149) – (149)

Total comprehensive loss – $ – $ (2,926) $ (130) $ – $ (3,056) $ (52) $ (3,108)

Transactions with owners Dividends – – (232) – – (232) – (232) Issued on exercise of stock options 18 – – – – – – – De-recognition of stock option expense – (5) – – – (5) – (5) Recognized on divestment of 10% of Acacia Mining plc – – – – 7 7 174 181 Funding from non-controlling interests – – – – – – 29 29 Other decrease in non-controlling interests – – – – – – (4) (4)

Total transactions with owners 18 $ (5) $ (232) $ – $ 7 $ (230) $ 199 $ (31)

At December 31, 2014 1,164,670 $ 20,864 $ (10,739) $ (199) $ 321 $ 10,247 $ 2,615 $ 12,862

1. Includes cumulative translation adjustments as at December 31, 2015: $178 million loss (2014: $122 million).2. Includes additional paid-in capital as at December 31, 2015: $283 million (December 31, 2014: $283 million) and convertible borrowings – equity component

as at December 31, 2015: $38 million (December 31, 2014: $38 million).


NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

Barrick Gold Corporation. Tabular dollar amounts in millions of United States dollars, unless otherwise shown. References to A$, ARS, C$, CLP, DOP, EUR, GBP, PGK, SAR, TZS, ZAR, and ZMW are to Australian dollars, Argentinean pesos, Canadian dollars, Chilean pesos, Dominican pesos, Euros, British pound sterling, Papua New Guinea kina, Saudi riyal, Tanzanian shillings, South African rand, and Zambian kwacha, respectively.

1 Corporate Information

Barrick Gold Corporation (“Barrick” or the “Company”) is a corporation governed by the Business Corporations Act (Ontario). The Company’s head and registered office is located at Brookfield Place, TD Canada Trust Tower, 161 Bay Street, Suite 3700, Toronto, Ontario, M5J 2S1. We are principally engaged in the production and sale of gold and copper, as well as related activities such as exploration and mine development. Our producing gold mines are located in Canada, the United States, Peru, Argentina, Australia, and the Dominican Republic. We hold a 50% equity interest in Barrick Niugini Limited (“BNL”), which owns a 95% interest in Porgera, a gold mine located in Papua New Guinea. We also hold a 63.9% equity interest in Acacia Mining plc (“Acacia”), formerly African Barrick Gold plc, a company listed on the London Stock Exchange that owns gold mines and exploration properties in Africa. We have a copper mine that is located in Zambia, a 50% interest in a copper mine in Saudi Arabia, and a 50% interest in Zaldívar, located in Chile. We also have various gold projects located in South America and North America. We sell our gold and copper production into the world market.

2 Significant Accounting Policies

a) Statement of ComplianceThese consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (“IASB”) under the historical cost convention, as modified by revaluation of derivative contracts and certain financial assets. Accounting policies are consistently applied to all years presented, unless otherwise stated. Certain items within the statement of income have been reclassified in the current year. The prior periods have been restated to reflect the change in presentation. These consolidated financial statements were approved for issuance by the Board of Directors on February 17, 2016.

b) Basis of PreparationSubsidiariesThese consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Barrick and its subsidiaries. All intercompany balances, transactions, income and expenses, and profits or losses have been eliminated on consolidation. We consolidate subsidiaries where we have the ability to exercise control. Control of an investee is defined to exist when we are exposed to variable returns from our involvement with the investee and have the ability to affect those returns through our power over the investee. Specifically, we control an investee if, and only if, we have all of the following: power over the investee (i.e., existing rights that give us the current ability to direct the relevant activities of the investee); exposure, or rights, to variable returns from our involvement with the investee; and the ability to use our power over the investee to affect its returns. For non wholly-owned, controlled subsidiaries, the net assets attributable to outside equity shareholders are presented as “non-controlling interests” in the equity section of the consolidated balance sheet. Profit or loss for the period that is attributable to non-controlling interests is calculated based on the ownership of the minority shareholders in the subsidiary.

Joint ArrangementsA joint arrangement is defined as one over which two or more parties have joint control, which is the contractually agreed sharing of control over an arrangement. This exists only when the decisions about the relevant activities (being those that significantly affect the returns of the arrangement) require the unanimous consent of the parties sharing control. There are two types of joint arrangements, joint operations (“JO”) and joint ventures (“JV”).

A JO is a joint arrangement whereby the parties that have joint control of the arrangement have rights to the assets and obligations for the liabilities, relating to the arrangement. In relation to our interests in joint operations, we recognize our share of any assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses of the JO.



A JV is a joint arrangement whereby the parties that have joint control of the arrangement have rights to the net assets of the joint venture. Our investments in JVs are accounted for using the equity method.

On acquisition, an equity method investment is initially recognized at cost. The carrying amount of equity method investments includes goodwill identified on acquisition, net of any accumulated impairment losses. The carrying amount is adjusted by our share of post-acquisition net income or loss, depreciation, amortization or impairment of the fair value adjustments made on the underlying balance sheet at the date of acquisition, dividends, cash contributions and our share of post-acquisition movements in Other Comprehensive Income (“OCI”).

c) Business CombinationsOn the acquisition of a business, the acquisition method of accounting is used, whereby the purchase consideration is allocated to the identifiable assets and liabilities on the basis of fair value at the date of acquisition. Provisional fair values allocated at a reporting date are finalized as soon as the relevant information is available, within a period not to exceed twelve months from the acquisition date with retroactive restatement of the impact of adjustments to those provisional fair values effective as at the acquisition date. Incremental costs related to acquisitions are expensed as incurred.

Associates An associate is an entity over which the investor has significant influence but not control or joint control. Significant influence is presumed to exist where the Company has between 20% and 50% of the voting rights, but can also arise where the Company has less than 20% if we have the power to be actively involved and influential in policy decisions affecting the entity. Our share of the net assets and net income or loss is accounted for in the consolidated financial statements using the equity method of accounting.

When the cost of the acquisition exceeds the fair values of the identifiable net assets acquired, the difference is recorded as goodwill. If the fair value attributable to Barrick’s share of the identifiable net assets exceeds the cost of acquisition, the difference is recognized as a gain in the consolidated statement of income.

Non-controlling interests represent the fair value of net assets in subsidiaries, as at the date of acquisition that are not held by Barrick and are presented in the equity section of the consolidated balance sheet.

Outlined below is information related to our joint arrangements and entities other than 100% owned Barrick subsidiaries at December 31, 2015:

Place of business Entity type Economic interest1 Method2

Turquoise Ridge Mine3 United States JO 75% Our share Kalgoorlie Mine Australia JO 50% Our share Acacia Mining plc4 Tanzania Subsidiary, publicly traded 63.9% Consolidation Pueblo Viejo4 Dominican Republic Subsidiary 60% Consolidation Cerro Casale Project4 Chile Subsidiary 75% Consolidation Donlin Gold Project United States JO 50% Our share Jabal Sayid5 Saudi Arabia JV 50% Equity Method Kabanga Project5,6 Tanzania JV 50% Equity Method Round Mountain Mine7 United States JO 50% Our share Porgera Mine8 Papua New Guinea JO 47.5% Our share Zaldívar5,9 Chile JV 50% Equity Method South Arturo4 United States Subsidiary 60% Consolidation

1. Unless otherwise noted, all of our joint arrangements are funded by contributions made by their partners in proportion to their economic interest. 2. For our JOs, we recognize our share of any assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses of the JO. 3. We have joint control given that decisions about relevant activities require unanimous consent of the parties to the joint operation.4. We consolidate our interests in Pueblo Viejo, Cerro Casale, Acacia and South Arturo and record a non-controlling interest for the 40%, 25%, 36.1% and 40%,

respectively, that we do not own. 5. Barrick has commitments of $471 million relating to its interest in the joint ventures in 2015. 6. Our JV is an early stage exploration project and, as such, does not have any significant assets, liabilities, income, contractual commitments or contingencies.

Expenses are recognized through our equity pick-up (loss). Refer to note 15 for further details. 7. We divested our interest in Round Mountain subsequent to year-end.8. We divested 50% of our interest in Porgera during the year, bringing our interest down from 95% to 47.5%.9. We divested 50% of our interest during the year.



d) Non-Current Assets and Disposal Groups Held-for-Sale and Discontinued Operations

Non-current assets and disposal groups are classified as assets held-for-sale (“HFS”) if it is highly probable that the value of these assets will be recovered primarily through sale rather than through continuing use. They are recorded at the lower of carrying amount and fair value less cost of disposal. Impairment losses on initial classification as HFS and subsequent gains and losses on remeasurement are recognized in the income statement. Once classified as held-for-sale, property, plant and equipment are no longer amortized. The assets and liabilities are presented as held-for-sale in the consolidated balance sheet when the sale is highly probable, the asset or disposal group is available for immediate sale in its present condition and management is committed to the sale, which should be expected to be completed within one year from the date of classification.

A discontinued operation is a component of the Company that can be clearly distinguished from the rest of the Company and represents a major line of business or geographic area, and the value of this component is expected to be recovered primarily through sale rather than continuing use.

Results of operations and any gain or loss from disposal are excluded from income before finance items and income taxes and are reported separately as income/loss from discontinued operations.

e) Foreign Currency TranslationThe functional currency of the Company, for each subsidiary of the Company, and for joint arrangements and associates, is the currency of the primary economic environment in which it operates. The functional currency of all of our operations is the US dollar. We translate non-US dollar balances for these operations into US dollars as follows: Property, plant and equipment (“PP&E”), intangible

assets and equity method investments using the rates at the time of acquisition;

Fair value through other comprehensive income (“FVOCI”) equity investments using the closing exchange rate as at the balance sheet date with translation gains and losses permanently recorded in Other Comprehensive Income (“OCI”);

Deferred tax assets and liabilities using the closing exchange rate as at the balance sheet date with translation gains and losses recorded in income tax expense;

Other assets and liabilities using the closing exchange rate as at the balance sheet date with translation gains and losses recorded in other income/expense; and

Income and expenses using the average exchange rate for the period, except for expenses that relate to non-monetary assets and liabilities measured at historical rates, which are translated using the same historical rate as the associated non-monetary assets and liabilities.

f) Revenue RecognitionWe record revenue when evidence exists that all of the following criteria are met: The significant risks and rewards of ownership of the

product have been transferred to the buyer; Neither continuing managerial involvement to the

degree usually associated with ownership, nor effective control over the goods sold, has been retained;

The amount of revenue can be reliably measured; It is probable that the economic benefits associated

with the sale will flow to us; and The costs incurred or to be incurred in respect of the

sale can be reliably measured.

These conditions are generally satisfied when title passes to the customer.

Gold Bullion SalesGold bullion is sold primarily in the London spot market. The sales price is fixed at the delivery date based on the gold spot price. Generally, we record revenue from gold bullion sales at the time of physical delivery, which is also the date that title to the gold passes.

Concentrate SalesUnder the terms of concentrate sales contracts with independent smelting companies, gold and copper sales prices are provisionally set on a specified future date after shipment based on market prices. We record revenues under these contracts at the time of shipment, which is also when the risk and rewards of ownership pass to the smelting companies, using forward market gold and copper prices on the expected date that final sales prices will be determined. Variations between the price recorded at the shipment date and the actual final price set under the smelting contracts are caused by changes in market gold and copper prices, which result in the existence of an embedded derivative in accounts receivable. The embedded derivative is recorded at fair value each period until final settlement occurs, with



changes in fair value classified as provisional price adjustments and included in revenue in the consolidated statement of income.

Copper Cathode SalesUnder the terms of copper cathode sales contracts, copper sales prices are provisionally set on a specified future date based upon market commodity prices plus certain price adjustments. Revenue is recognized at the time of shipment, which is also when the risks and rewards of ownership pass to the customer. Revenue is provisionally measured using forward market prices on the expected date that final selling prices will be determined. Variations occur between the price recorded on the date of revenue recognition and the actual final price under the terms of the contracts due to changes in market copper prices, which result in the existence of an embedded derivative in accounts receivable. This embedded derivative is recorded at fair value each period until final settlement occurs, with changes in fair value classified as provisional price adjustments and included in revenue in the consolidated statement of income.

g) Exploration and Evaluation (“E&E”)Exploration expenditures are the costs incurred in the initial search for mineral deposits with economic potential or in the process of obtaining more information about existing mineral deposits. Exploration expenditures typically include costs associated with prospecting, sampling, mapping, diamond drilling and other work involved in searching for ore.

Evaluation expenditures are the costs incurred to establish the technical and commercial viability of developing mineral deposits identified through exploration activities or by acquisition. Evaluation expenditures include the cost of (i) establishing the volume and grade of deposits through drilling of core samples, trenching and sampling activities in an ore body that is classified as either a mineral resource or a proven and probable reserve; (ii) determining the optimal methods of extraction and metallurgical and treatment processes; (iii) studies related to surveying, transportation and infrastructure requirements; (iv) permitting activities; and (v) economic evaluations to determine whether development of the mineralized material is commercially justified, including scoping, prefeasibility and final feasibility studies.

Exploration and evaluation expenditures are expensed as incurred unless management determines that probable future economic benefits will be generated

as a result of the expenditures. Once the technical feasibility and commercial viability of a program or project has been demonstrated with a prefeasibility study, and we have recognized reserves in accordance with National Instrument 43-101, we account for future expenditures incurred in the development of that program or project in accordance with our policy for Property, Plant & Equipment, as described in note 2m.

h) Earnings per ShareEarnings per share is computed by dividing net income available to common shareholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the period. Diluted earnings per share reflect the potential dilution that could occur if additional common shares are assumed to be issued under securities that entitle their holders to obtain common shares in the future. For stock options, the number of additional shares for inclusion in diluted earnings per share calculations is determined using the treasury stock method. Under this method, stock options, whose exercise price is less than the average market price of our common shares, are assumed to be exercised and the proceeds are used to repurchase common shares at the average market price for the period. The incremental number of common shares issued under stock options and repurchased from proceeds is included in the calculation of diluted earnings per share.

i) TaxationCurrent tax for each taxable entity is based on the local taxable income at the local statutory tax rate enacted or substantively enacted at the balance sheet date and includes adjustments to tax payable or recoverable in respect of previous periods.

Deferred tax is recognized using the balance sheet method in respect of all temporary differences between the tax bases of assets and liabilities, and their carrying amounts for financial reporting purposes, except as indicated below.

Deferred income tax liabilities are recognized for all taxable temporary differences, except: Where the deferred income tax liability arises from

the initial recognition of goodwill, or the initial recognition of an asset or liability in an acquisition that is not a business combination and, at the time of the acquisition, affects neither the accounting profit nor taxable profit or loss; and



In respect of taxable temporary differences associated with investments in subsidiaries and interests in joint arrangements, where the timing of the reversal of the temporary differences can be controlled and it is probable that the temporary differences will not reverse in the foreseeable future.

Deferred income tax assets are recognized for all deductible temporary differences and the carry forward of unused tax assets and unused tax losses, to the extent that it is probable that taxable profit will be available against which the deductible temporary differences and the carry forward of unused tax assets and unused tax losses can be utilized, except: Where the deferred income tax asset relating to the

deductible temporary difference arises from the initial recognition of an asset or liability in an acquisition that is not a business combination and, at the time of the acquisition, affects neither the accounting profit nor taxable profit or loss; and

In respect of deductible temporary differences associated with investments in subsidiaries and interests in joint arrangements, deferred tax assets are recognized only to the extent that it is probable that the temporary differences will reverse in the foreseeable future and taxable profit will be available against which the temporary differences can be utilized.

The carrying amount of deferred income tax assets is reviewed at each balance sheet date and reduced to the extent that it is no longer probable that sufficient taxable profit will be available to allow all or part of the deferred income tax asset to be utilized. To the extent that an asset not previously recognized fulfills the criteria for recognition, a deferred income tax asset is recorded.

Deferred tax is measured on an undiscounted basis at the tax rates that are expected to apply in the periods in which the asset is realized or the liability is settled, based on tax rates and tax laws enacted or substantively enacted at the balance sheet date.

Current and deferred tax relating to items recognized directly in equity are recognized in equity and not in the income statement.

Royalties and Special Mining TaxesIncome tax expense includes the cost of royalty and special mining taxes payable to governments that are calculated based on a percentage of taxable profit whereby taxable profit represents net income adjusted for certain items defined in the applicable legislation.

Indirect TaxesIndirect tax recoverable is recorded at its undiscounted amount, and is disclosed as non-current if not expected to be recovered within twelve months.

j) Other InvestmentsInvestments in publicly quoted equity securities that are neither subsidiaries nor associates are categorized as fair value through other comprehensive income (“FVOCI”) pursuant to the irrevocable election available in IFRS 9 for these instruments. FVOCI equity investments (referred to as “other investments”) are recorded at fair value with all realized and unrealized gains and losses recorded permanently in OCI.

k) InventoryMaterial extracted from our mines is classified as either ore or waste. Ore represents material that, at the time of extraction, we expect to process into a saleable form and sell at a profit. Raw materials are comprised of both ore in stockpiles and ore on leach pads as processing is required to extract benefit from the ore. Ore is accumulated in stockpiles that are subsequently processed into gold/copper in a saleable form. The recovery of gold and copper from certain oxide ores is achieved through the heap leaching process. Work in process represents gold/copper in the processing circuit that has not completed the production process, and is not yet in a saleable form. Finished goods inventory represents gold/copper in saleable form. Mine operating supplies represent commodity consumables and other raw materials used in the production process, as well as spare parts and other maintenance supplies that are not classified as capital items.

Inventories are valued at the lower of cost and net realizable value. Cost is determined on a weighted average basis and includes all costs incurred, based on a normal production capacity, in bringing each product to its present location and condition. Cost of inventories comprises direct labor, materials and contractor expenses, including non-capitalized stripping costs; depreciation on PP&E including capitalized stripping costs; and an allocation of general and administrative costs. As ore is removed for processing, costs are removed based on the average cost per ounce/pound in the stockpile.

We record provisions to reduce inventory to net realizable value to reflect changes in economic factors that impact inventory value and to reflect present intentions for the use of slow moving and obsolete supplies inventory. Net realizable value is determined with reference to relevant market prices less applicable



variable selling expenses. Provisions recorded also reflect an estimate of the remaining costs of completion to bring the inventory into its saleable form. Provisions are also recorded to reduce mine operating supplies to net realizable value, which is generally calculated by reference to its salvage or scrap value, when it is determined that the supplies are obsolete. Provisions are reversed to reflect subsequent recoveries in net realizable value where the inventory is still on hand.

l) Production StageA mine that is under construction is determined to enter the production stage when the project is in the location and condition necessary for it to be capable of operating in the manner intended by management. We use the following factors to assess whether these criteria have been met: (1) the level of capital expenditures compared to construction cost estimates; (2) the completion of a reasonable period of testing of mine plant and equipment; (3) the ability to produce minerals in saleable form (within specifications); and (4) the ability to sustain ongoing production of minerals.

When a mine construction project moves into the production stage, the capitalization of certain mine construction costs ceases and costs are either capitalized to inventory or expensed, except for capitalizable costs related to property, plant and equipment additions or improvements, open pit stripping activities that provide a future benefit, underground mine development or expenditures that meet the criteria for capitalization in accordance with IAS 16 Property Plant and Equipment.

Pre-production stripping costs (note 2m(iii)) are capitalized until an “other than de minimis” level of mineral is extracted, after which time such costs are either capitalized to inventory or, if it qualifies as an open pit stripping activity that provides a future benefit, to PP&E. We consider various relevant criteria to assess when an “other than de minimis” level of mineral is produced. Some of the criteria considered would include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) the amount of minerals mined versus total ounces in life of mine (“LOM”) ore; (2) the amount of ore tons mined versus total LOM expected ore tons mined; (3) the current stripping ratio versus the LOM strip ratio; and (4) the ore grade versus the LOM grade.

m) Property, Plant and EquipmentBuildings, Plant and EquipmentAt acquisition, we record buildings, plant and equipment at cost, including all expenditures incurred to prepare an asset for its intended use. These expenditures consist

of: the purchase price; brokers’ commissions; and installation costs including architectural, design and engineering fees, legal fees, survey costs, site preparation costs, freight charges, transportation insurance costs, duties, testing and preparation charges.

We capitalize costs that meet the asset recognition criteria. Costs incurred that do not extend the productive capacity or useful economic life of an asset are considered repairs and maintenance expense and are accounted for as a cost of the inventory produced in the period.

Buildings, plant and equipment are depreciated on a straight-line basis over their expected useful life, which commences when the assets are considered available for use. Once buildings, plant and equipment are considered available for use they are measured at cost less accumulated depreciation and applicable impairment losses.

Depreciation on equipment utilized in the development of assets, including open pit and underground mine development, is recapitalized as development costs attributable to the related asset.

Estimated Useful Lives of Major Asset Categories

Buildings, plant and equipment 7 – 38 years Underground mobile equipment 5 – 7 years Light vehicles and other mobile equipment 2 – 3 years Furniture, computer and office equipment 2 – 3 years

Leasing ArrangementsThe determination of whether an arrangement is, or contains, a lease is based on the substance of the arrangement at inception date, including whether the fulfillment of the arrangement is dependent on the use of a specific asset or assets or whether the arrangement conveys a right to use the asset.

Leasing arrangements that transfer substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership of the asset to Barrick are classified as finance leases. Assets acquired via a finance lease are recorded as an asset with a corresponding liability at an amount equal to the lower of the fair value of the leased property and the present value of the minimum lease payments. Each lease payment is allocated between the liability and finance costs using the effective interest method, whereby a constant rate of interest expense is recognized on the balance of the liability outstanding. The interest element of the lease is charged to the consolidated statement of income as a finance cost.

PP&E assets acquired under finance leases are depreciated over the shorter of the useful life of the asset and the lease term.



All other leases are classified as operating leases. Operating lease payments are recognized as an operating cost in the consolidated statements of income on a straight-line basis over the lease term.

Mineral PropertiesMineral properties consist of: the fair value attributable to mineral reserves and resources acquired in a business combination or asset acquisition; underground mine development costs; open pit mine development costs; capitalized exploration and evaluation costs; and capitalized interest. In addition, we incur project costs which are generally capitalized when the expenditures result in a future benefit.

i) Acquired Mining PropertiesOn acquisition of a mining property, we prepare an estimate of the fair value attributable to the proven and probable mineral reserves, mineral resources and exploration potential attributable to the property. The estimated fair value attributable to the mineral reserves and the portion of mineral resources considered to be probable of economic extraction at the time of the acquisition is depreciated on a units of production (“UOP”) basis whereby the denominator is the proven and probable reserves and the portion of mineral resources considered to be probable of economic extraction. The estimated fair value attributable to mineral resources that are not considered to be probable of economic extraction at the time of the acquisition is not subject to depreciation until the resources become probable of economic extraction in the future. The estimated fair value attributable to exploration licenses is recorded as an intangible asset and is not subject to depreciation until the property enters production.

ii) Underground Mine Development CostsAt our underground mines, we incur development costs to build new shafts, drifts and ramps that will enable us to physically access ore underground. The time over which we will continue to incur these costs depends on the mine life. These underground development costs are capitalized as incurred.

Capitalized underground development costs incurred to enable access to specific ore blocks or areas of the underground mine, and which only provide an economic benefit over the period of mining that ore block or area, are depreciated on a UOP basis, whereby the denominator is estimated ounces/pounds of gold/copper in proven and probable reserves and the portion of

resources within that ore block or area that is considered probable of economic extraction.

If capitalized underground development costs provide an economic benefit over the entire mine life, the costs are depreciated on a UOP basis, whereby the denominator is the estimated ounces/pounds of gold/copper in total accessible proven and probable reserves and the portion of resources that is considered probable of economic extraction.

iii) Open Pit Mining CostsIn open pit mining operations, it is necessary to remove overburden and other waste materials to access ore from which minerals can be extracted economically. The process of mining overburden and waste materials is referred to as stripping. Stripping costs incurred in order to provide initial access to the ore body (referred to as pre-production stripping) are capitalized as open pit mine development costs.

Stripping costs incurred during the production stage of a pit are accounted for as costs of the inventory produced during the period that the stripping costs are incurred, unless these costs are expected to provide a future economic benefit to an identifiable component of the ore body. Components of the ore body are based on the distinct development phases identified by the mine planning engineers when determining the optimal development plan for the open pit. Production phase stripping costs generate a future economic benefit when the related stripping activity: (i) improves access to a component of the ore body to be mined in the future; (ii) increases the fair value of the mine (or pit) as access to future mineral reserves becomes less costly; and (iii) increases the productive capacity or extends the productive life of the mine (or pit). Production phase stripping costs that are expected to generate a future economic benefit are capitalized as open pit mine development costs.

Capitalized open pit mine development costs are depreciated on a UOP basis whereby the denominator is the estimated ounces/pounds of gold/copper in proven and probable reserves and the portion of resources considered probable of economic extraction based on the current LOM plan in the current component of the ore body that has been made more accessible through the stripping activity and all future components in the current plan that benefit from the particular stripping activity. Capitalized open pit mine development costs are depreciated once the open pit has entered production and the future economic benefit is being derived.



Construction-in-ProgressAssets under construction at operating mines are capitalized as construction-in-progress. The cost of construction-in-progress comprises its purchase price and any costs directly attributable to bringing it into working condition for its intended use. Construction-in-progress amounts related to development projects are included in the carrying amount of the development project. Construction-in-progress amounts incurred at operating mines are presented as a separate asset within PP&E. Construction-in-progress also includes deposits on long lead items. Construction-in-progress is not depreciated. Depreciation commences once the asset is complete and available for use.

Capitalized InterestWe capitalize interest costs for qualifying assets. Qualifying assets are assets that require a significant amount of time to prepare for their intended use, including projects that are in the exploration and evaluation, development or construction stages. Qualifying assets also include significant expansion projects at our operating mines. Capitalized interest costs are considered an element of the cost of the qualifying asset which is determined based on gross expenditures incurred on an asset. Capitalization ceases when the asset is substantially complete or if active development is suspended or ceases. Where the funds used to finance a qualifying asset form part of general borrowings, the amount capitalized is calculated using a weighted average of rates applicable to the relevant borrowings during the period. Where funds borrowed are directly attributable to a qualifying asset, the amount capitalized represents the borrowing costs specific to those borrowings. Where surplus funds available out of money borrowed specifically to finance a project are temporarily invested, the total capitalized interest is reduced by income generated from short-term investments of such funds.

InsuranceWe record losses relating to insurable events as they occur. Proceeds receivable from insurance coverage are recorded at such time as receipt is receivable or virtually certain and the amount receivable is fixed or determinable. For business interruption the amount is only recognized when it is virtually certain or receivable as supported by receipt of notification of a minimum or proposed settlement amount from the insurance adjuster.

n) GoodwillUnder the acquisition method of accounting, the costs of business combinations are allocated to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed based on the estimated fair value at the date of acquisition. The excess of the fair value of consideration paid over the fair value of the identifiable net assets acquired is recorded as goodwill. Goodwill is not amortized; instead it is tested annually for impairment at the start of the fourth quarter for all of our segments. In addition, at each reporting period we assess whether there is an indication that goodwill is impaired and, if there is such an indication, we would test for goodwill impairment at that time. At the date of acquisition, goodwill is assigned to the cash generating unit (“CGU”) or group of CGUs that is expected to benefit from the synergies of the business combination. For the purposes of impairment testing, goodwill is allocated to the Company’s operating segments, which are our individual mine sites and corresponds to the level at which goodwill is internally monitored by the Chief Operating Decision Maker (“CODM”), the President.

The recoverable amount of an operating segment is the higher of Value in Use (“VIU”) and Fair Value Less Costs of Disposal (“FVLCD”). A goodwill impairment is recognized for any excess of the carrying amount of the operating segment over its recoverable amount. Goodwill impairment charges are not reversible.

o) Intangible AssetsIntangible assets acquired by way of an asset acquisition or business combination are recognized if the asset is separable or arises from contractual or legal rights and the fair value can be measured reliably on initial recognition.

On acquisition of a mineral property in the exploration stage, we prepare an estimate of the fair value attributable to the exploration licenses acquired, including the fair value attributable to mineral resources, if any, of that property. The fair value of the exploration license is recorded as an intangible asset (acquired exploration potential) as at the date of acquisition. When an exploration stage property moves into development, the acquired exploration potential attributable to that property is transferred to mining interests within PP&E.

p) Impairment of Non-Current AssetsWe review and test the carrying amounts of PP&E and intangible assets with finite lives when an indicator of impairment is considered to exist. Impairment assessments on PP&E and intangible assets are conducted at the level of the CGU, which is the lowest level for



which identifiable cash flows are largely independent of the cash flows of other assets and includes any liabilities specific to the CGU. For operating mines and projects, the individual mine/project represents a CGU for impairment testing.

The recoverable amount of a CGU is the higher of VIU and FVLCD. An impairment loss is recognized for any excess of the carrying amount of a CGU over its recoverable amount where both the recoverable amount and carrying value include the associated other assets and liabilities, including taxes where applicable, of the CGU. Where it is not appropriate to allocate the loss to a separate asset, an impairment loss related to a CGU is allocated to the carrying amount of the assets of the CGU on a pro rata basis based on the carrying amount of its non-monetary assets.

Impairment ReversalImpairment losses for PP&E and intangible assets are reversed if there has been a change in the estimates used to determine the asset’s recoverable amount since the last impairment loss was recognized, and it has been determined that the asset is no longer impaired or that impairment has decreased. This reversal is recognized in the consolidated statements of income and is limited to the carrying value that would have been determined, net of any depreciation where applicable, had no impairment charge been recognized in prior years. When an impairment reversal is undertaken, the recoverable amount is assessed by reference to the higher of VIU and FVLCD.

q) DebtDebt is recognized initially at fair value, net of financing costs incurred, and subsequently measured at amortized cost. Any difference between the amounts originally received and the redemption value of the debt is recognized in the consolidated statements of income over the period to maturity using the effective interest method.

r) Derivative Instruments and Hedge AccountingDerivative InstrumentsDerivative instruments are recorded at fair value on the consolidated balance sheet, classified based on contractual maturity. Derivative instruments are classified as either hedges of the fair value of recognized assets or liabilities or of firm commitments (“fair value hedges”), hedges of highly probable forecasted transactions (“cash flow hedges”) or non-hedge derivatives. Derivatives designated as either a fair value or cash flow hedge that are expected to be highly effective in achieving offsetting changes in

fair value or cash flows are assessed on an ongoing basis to determine that they actually have been highly effective throughout the financial reporting periods for which they were designated. Derivative assets and derivative liabilities are shown separately in the balance sheet unless there is a legal right to offset and intent to settle on a net basis.

Fair Value HedgesChanges in the fair value of derivatives that are designated and qualify as fair value hedges are recorded in the consolidated statements of income, together with any changes in the fair value of the hedged asset or liability or firm commitment that is attributable to the hedged risk.

Cash Flow HedgesThe effective portion of changes in the fair value of derivatives that are designated and qualify as cash flow hedges is recognized in equity. The gain or loss relating to the ineffective portion is recognized in the consolidated statements of income. Amounts accumulated in equity are transferred to the consolidated statements of income in the period when the forecasted transaction impacts earnings. When the forecasted transaction that is hedged results in the recognition of a non-financial asset or a non-financial liability, the gains and losses previously deferred in equity are transferred from equity and included in the measurement of the initial carrying amount of the asset or liability.

When a derivative designated as a cash flow hedge expires or is sold and the forecasted transaction is still expected to occur, any cumulative gain or loss relating to the derivative that is recorded in equity at that time remains in equity and is recognized in the consolidated statements of income when the forecasted transaction occurs. When a forecasted transaction is no longer expected to occur, the cumulative gain or loss that was recorded in equity is immediately transferred to the consolidated statements of income.

Non-Hedge DerivativesDerivative instruments that do not qualify as either fair value or cash flow hedges are recorded at their fair value at the balance sheet date, with changes in fair value recognized in the consolidated statements of income.

s) Embedded Derivatives Derivatives embedded in other financial instruments or executory contracts are accounted for as separate derivatives when their risks and characteristics are not



closely related to their host financial instrument or contract. In some cases, the embedded derivatives may be designated as hedges and are accounted for as described above.

t) Environmental Rehabilitation ProvisionMining, extraction and processing activities normally give rise to obligations for environmental rehabilitation. Rehabilitation work can include facility decommissioning and dismantling; removal or treatment of waste materials; site and land rehabilitation, including compliance with and monitoring of environmental regulations; security and other site-related costs required to perform the rehabilitation work; and operation of equipment designed to reduce or eliminate environmental effects. The extent of work required and the associated costs are dependent on the requirements of relevant authorities and our environmental policies. Routine operating costs that may impact the ultimate closure and rehabilitation activities, such as waste material handling conducted as an integral part of a mining or production process, are not included in the provision. Costs arising from unforeseen circumstances, such as the contamination caused by unplanned discharges, are recognized as an expense and liability when the event that gives rise to an obligation occurs and reliable estimates of the required rehabilitation costs can be made.

Provisions for the cost of each rehabilitation program are normally recognized at the time that an environmental disturbance occurs or a constructive obligation is determined. When the extent of disturbance increases over the life of an operation, the provision is increased accordingly. The major parts of the carrying amount of provisions relate to tailings pond closure/rehabilitation; demolition of buildings/mine facilities; ongoing water treatment; and ongoing care and maintenance and security of closed mines. Costs included in the provision encompass all closure and rehabilitation activity expected to occur progressively over the life of the operation at the time of closure and post-closure in connection with disturbances as at the reporting date. Estimated costs included in the determination of the provision reflect the risks and probabilities of alternative estimates of cash flows required to settle the obligation at each particular operation. The expected rehabilitation costs are estimated based on the cost of external contractors performing the work or the cost of performing the work internally depending on management’s intention.

The timing of the actual rehabilitation expenditure is dependent upon a number of factors such as the life and nature of the asset, the operating license conditions

and the environment in which the mine operates. Expenditures may occur before and after closure and can continue for an extended period of time depending on rehabilitation requirements. Rehabilitation provisions are measured at the expected value of future cash flows, which exclude the effect of inflation, discounted to their present value using a current US dollar real risk-free pre-tax discount rate. The unwinding of the discount, referred to as accretion expense, is included in finance costs and results in an increase in the amount of the provision. Provisions are updated each reporting period for changes to expected cash flows and for the effect of changes in the discount rate, and the change in estimate is added or deducted from the related asset and depreciated over the expected economic life of the operation to which it relates.

Significant judgments and estimates are involved in forming expectations of future activities and the amount and timing of the associated cash flows. Those expectations are formed based on existing environmental and regulatory requirements or, if more stringent, our environmental policies which give rise to a constructive obligation.

When provisions for closure and rehabilitation are initially recognized, the corresponding cost is capitalized as an asset, representing part of the cost of acquiring the future economic benefits of the operation. The capitalized cost of closure and rehabilitation activities is recognized in PP&E and depreciated over the expected economic life of the operation to which it relates.

Adjustments to the estimated amount and timing of future closure and rehabilitation cash flows are a normal occurrence in light of the significant judgments and estimates involved. The principal factors that can cause expected cash flows to change are: the construction of new processing facilities; changes in the quantities of material in reserves and resources with a corresponding change in the life of mine plan; changing ore characteristics that impact required environmental protection measures and related costs; changes in water quality that impact the extent of water treatment required; changes in discount rates; changes in foreign exchange rates; and changes in laws and regulations governing the protection of the environment.

Rehabilitation provisions are adjusted as a result of changes in estimates and assumptions. Those adjustments are accounted for as a change in the corresponding cost of the related assets, including the related mineral property, except where a reduction in the provision is greater than the remaining net book value of the related assets, in which case the value is reduced to nil and the



remaining adjustment is recognized in the consolidated statements of income. In the case of closed sites, changes in estimates and assumptions are recognized immediately in the consolidated statements of income. For an operating mine, the adjusted carrying amount of the related asset is depreciated prospectively. Adjustments also result in changes to future finance costs.

u) Litigation and Other ProvisionsProvisions are recognized when a present obligation exists (legal or constructive), as a result of a past event, for which it is probable that an outflow of resources will be required to settle the obligation, and a reliable estimate can be made of the amount of the obligation. Provisions are discounted to their present value using a current US dollar real risk-free pre-tax discount rate and the accretion expense is included in finance costs.

Certain conditions may exist as of the date the financial statements are issued, which may result in a loss to the Company, but which will only be resolved when one or more future events occur or fail to occur. In assessing loss contingencies related to legal proceedings that are pending against us or unasserted claims that may result in such proceedings, the Company with assistance from its legal counsel evaluate the perceived merits of any legal proceedings or unasserted claims as well as the perceived merits of the amount of relief sought or expected to be sought.

If the assessment of a contingency suggests that a loss is probable, and the amount can be reliably estimated, then a loss is recorded. When a contingent loss is not probable but is reasonably possible, or is probable but the amount of loss cannot be reliably estimated, then details of the contingent loss are disclosed. Loss contingencies considered remote are generally not disclosed unless they involve guarantees, in which case we disclose the nature of the guarantee. Legal fees incurred in connection with pending legal proceedings are expensed as incurred. Contingent gains are only recognized when the inflow of economic benefits is virtually certain.

v) Stock-Based CompensationBarrick offers equity-settled (Employee Stock Option Plan (“ESOP”), Employee Share Purchase Plan (“ESPP”)), cash-settled (Restricted Share Units (“RSU”), Deferred Share Units (“DSU”), Performance Restricted Share Units (“PRSU”)) and Performance Granted Share Units (“PGSU”) awards to certain employees, officers and directors of the Company.

Equity-settled awards are measured at fair value using the Lattice model with market related inputs as of the date of the grant. The cost is recorded over the vesting period of the award to the same expense category as the award recipient’s payroll costs (i.e., cost of sales, general and administrative) and the corresponding entry is recorded in equity. Equity-settled awards are not remeasured subsequent to the initial grant date.

Cash-settled awards are measured at fair value initially using the market value of the underlying shares on the day preceding the date of the grant of the award and are required to be remeasured to fair value at each reporting date until settlement. The cost is then recorded over the vesting period of the award. This expense, and any changes in the fair value of the award, is recorded to the same expense category as the award recipient’s payroll costs. The cost of a cash-settled award is recorded within liabilities until settled.

We use the accelerated method (also referred to as ‘graded’ vesting) for attributing stock option expense over the vesting period. Stock option expense incorporates an expected forfeiture rate. The expected forfeiture rate is estimated based on historical forfeiture rates and expectations of future forfeiture rates. We make adjustments if the actual forfeiture rate differs from the expected rate.

Employee Stock Option Plan (“ESOP”)Under Barrick’s ESOP, certain officers and key employees of the Corporation may purchase common shares at an exercise price that is equal to the closing share price on the day before the grant of the option. The grant date is the date when the details of the award, including the number of options granted to the individual and the exercise price, are approved. Stock options vest equally over four years, beginning in the year after granting. The ESOP arrangement has graded vesting terms, and therefore multiple vesting periods must be valued and accounted for separately over their respective vesting periods. The compensation expense of the instruments issued for each grant under the ESOP is calculated using the Lattice model. The compensation expense is adjusted by the estimated forfeiture rate which is estimated based on historical forfeiture rates and expectations of future forfeiture rates. We make adjustments if the actual forfeiture rate differs from the expected rate.



Restricted Share Units (“RSU”) Under our RSU plan, selected employees are granted RSUs where each RSU has a value equal to one Barrick common share. RSUs generally vest within three years and primarily settle in cash upon vesting. Additional RSUs are credited to reflect dividends paid on Barrick common shares over the vesting period.

A liability for RSUs is measured at fair value on the grant date and is subsequently adjusted for changes in fair value. The liability is recognized on a straight-line basis over the vesting period, with a corresponding charge to compensation expense, as a component of corporate administration and operating segment administration. Compensation expenses for RSUs incorporate an estimate for expected forfeiture rates based on which the fair value is adjusted.

Deferred Share Units (“DSU”)Under our DSU plan, Directors must receive at least 75% of their basic annual retainer in the form of DSUs or cash to purchase common shares that cannot be sold, transferred or otherwise disposed of until the Director leaves the Board. Each DSU has the same value as one Barrick common share. DSUs must be retained until the Director leaves the Board, at which time the cash value of the DSUs is paid out. Additional DSUs are credited to reflect dividends paid on Barrick common shares. The initial fair value of the liability is calculated as of the grant date and is recognized immediately. Subsequently, at each reporting date and on settlement, the liability is remeasured, with any change in fair value recorded as compensation expense in the period. Officers may also elect to receive a portion or all of their incentive compensation in the form of DSUs. The plan also allows granting of DSUs to other officers and employees at the discretion of the Board Compensation Committee.

Performance Restricted Share Units (“PRSU”)Under our PRSU plan, selected employees are granted PRSUs, where each PRSU has a value equal to one Barrick common share. PRSUs vest at the end of a three-year period and are settled in cash on the third anniversary of the grant date. Additional PRSUs are credited to reflect dividends paid on Barrick common shares over the vesting period. Vesting, and therefore the liability, is based on the achievement of performance goals and the target settlement ranges from 0% to 200% of the original grant of units.

The value of a PRSU reflects the value of a Barrick common share and the number of shares issued is adjusted for its relative performance against certain

competitors and other internal financial performance measures. Therefore, the fair value of the PRSUs is determined with reference to the closing stock price at each remeasurement date.

The initial fair value of the liability is calculated as of the grant date and is recognized within compensation expense using the straight-line method over the vesting period. Subsequently, at each reporting date and on settlement, the liability is remeasured, with any changes in fair value recorded as compensation expense. The fair value is adjusted for the revised estimated forfeiture rate.

Performance Granted Share Units (“PGSU”)Under our PGSU plan, selected employees are granted PGSUs, where each PGSU has a value equal to one Barrick common share. Annual PGSU awards are determined based on a multiple ranging from one to six times base salary (depending on position and level of responsibility) multiplied by a performance factor. The number of PGSUs granted to a plan participant is determined by dividing the dollar value of the award by the closing price of Barrick common shares on the day prior to the grant, or if the grant date occurs during a blackout period, by the greater of (i) the closing price of Barrick common shares on the day prior to the grant date and (ii) the closing price of Barrick common shares on the first day following the expiration of the blackout. Upon vesting, the after-tax value of the award is used to purchase common shares and these shares cannot be sold until the employee retires or leaves Barrick. PGSUs vest at the end of the third year from the date of the grant.

The initial fair value of the liability is calculated as of the grant date and is recognized within compensation expense using the straight-line method over the vesting period. Subsequently, at each reporting date and on settlement, the liability is remeasured, with any changes in fair value recorded as compensation expense.

Employee Share Purchase Plan (“ESPP”)Under our ESPP plan, Barrick employees can purchase Company shares through payroll deduction. Each year, employees may contribute 1%–6% of their combined base salary and annual short-term incentive, and Barrick will match 50% of the contribution, up to a maximum of C$5,000 per year.

Both Barrick and the employee make the contributions on a semi-monthly basis with the funds being transferred to a custodian who purchases Barrick Common Shares in the open market. Shares purchased with employee contributions have no vesting requirement; however, shares purchased with Barrick’s contributions



vest approximately one year from contribution date. All dividend income is used to purchase additional Barrick shares.

Barrick records an expense equal to its semi-monthly cash contribution. No forfeiture rate is applied to the amounts accrued. Where an employee leaves prior to vesting, any accrual for contributions by Barrick during the year related to that employee is reversed.

w) Post-Retirement BenefitsDefined Contribution Pension PlansCertain employees take part in defined contribution employee benefit plans whereby we contribute up to 6% of the employee’s annual salary. We also have a retirement plan for certain officers of Barrick under which we contribute 15% of the officer’s annual salary and annual short-term incentive. The contributions are recognized as compensation expense as incurred. The Company has no further payment obligations once the contributions have been paid.

Defined Benefit Pension PlansWe have qualified defined benefit pension plans that cover certain former United States and Canadian employees and provide benefits based on employees’ years of service. Our policy is to fund the amounts necessary on an actuarial basis to provide enough assets to meet the benefits payable to plan members. Independent trustees administer assets of the plans, which are invested mainly in fixed-income and equity securities.

As well as the qualified plans, we have non-qualified defined benefit pension plans covering certain employees and former directors of Barrick. No funding is done on these plans and contributions for future years are required to be equal to benefit payments.

Actuarial gains and losses arising from experience adjustments and changes in actuarial assumptions are charged or credited to equity in OCI in the period in which they arise.

Our valuations are carried out using the projected unit credit method. We record the difference between the fair value of the plan assets and the present value of the plan obligations as an asset or liability on the consolidated balance sheets.

Pension Plan Assets and LiabilitiesPension plan assets, which consist primarily of fixed-income and equity securities, are valued using current market quotations. Plan obligations and the annual pension expense are determined on an actuarial basis and are affected by numerous assumptions and

estimates including the market value of plan assets, estimates of the expected return on plan assets, discount rates, future wage increases and other assumptions.

The discount rate and life expectancy are the assumptions that generally have the most significant impact on our pension cost and obligation.

Other Post-Retirement BenefitsWe provide post-retirement medical, dental, and life insurance benefits to certain employees. Actuarial gains and losses resulting from variances between actual results and economic estimates or actuarial assumptions are recorded in OCI.

x) New Accounting Standards Adopted during the Year

The Company has adopted IFRS 9 (2014) effective January 1, 2015.

IFRS 9 (2014)We have early adopted all of the requirements of IFRS 9 Financial Instruments 2014 (“IFRS 9”) as of January 1, 2015. IFRS 9 uses a single approach to determine whether a financial asset is classified and measured at amortized cost or fair value, replacing the multiple rules in IAS 39. The approach in IFRS 9 is based on how an entity manages its financial instruments and the contractual cash flow characteristics of the financial asset. Most of the requirements in IAS 39 for classification and measurement of financial liabilities were carried forward in IFRS 9. IFRS 9 introduced a single expected credit loss impairment model, which is based on changes in credit quality since initial recognition. The adoption of the expected credit loss impairment model did not have a significant impact on the Company’s financial statements.

IFRS 9 changes the requirements for hedge effectiveness and consequently for the application of hedge accounting. The IAS 39 effectiveness test is replaced with a requirement for an economic relationship between the hedged item and hedging instrument, and for the ‘hedged ratio’ to be the same as that used by the entity for risk management purposes. Certain restrictions that prevented some hedging strategies and hedging instruments from qualifying for hedge accounting were removed under IFRS 9. Generally, the mechanics of hedge accounting remain unchanged.

As a result of the early adoption of IFRS 9, we have changed our accounting policy for financial instruments retrospectively, except as described below. The change did not result in a change in carrying value of any of our financial instruments on transition date. The two main



Cash and equivalents and restricted cash include cash, term deposits, treasury bills and money market investments with original maturities of less than 90 days. All of these are classified as financial assets at fair value through profit or loss and are measured at fair value. Unrealized gains or losses related to changes in fair value are reported in income;

Trade and other receivables are classified as and measured at amortized cost using the effective interest method, less impairment allowance, if any;

Equity instruments are designated as financial assets at fair value through other comprehensive income and are recorded at fair value on the settlement date, net of transaction costs. Future changes in fair value are recognized in other comprehensive income and are not recycled into income.

Financial liabilities (excluding derivatives) are derecognized when the obligation specified in the contract is discharged, cancelled or expired. For financial liabilities, IFRS 9 retains most of the IAS 39 requirements and since we do not have any financial liabilities designated at fair value through profit or loss, the adoption of IFRS 9 did not impact our accounting policies for financial liabilities.

y) New Accounting Standards Issued but not Yet Effective

IFRS 15 Revenue from Contracts with CustomersIn May 2014, the IASB issued IFRS 15 Revenue from Contracts with Customers, which covers principles that an entity shall apply to report useful information to users of financial statements about the nature, amount, timing, and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from a contract with a customer. In September 2015, the IASB deferred the effective date of the standard to annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2018, with earlier application permitted. We are currently assessing the impact on our consolidated financial statements along with timing of our adoption of IFRS 15.

IFRS 16 LeasesIn January 2016, the IASB issued IFRS 16 Leases, which requires lessees to recognize assets and liabilities for most leases. Application of the standard is mandatory for annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2019, with earlier application permitted, provided the new revenue standard, IFRS 15 Revenue from Contracts with Customers, has been applied or is applied at the same date as IFRS 16. We are currently assessing the impact on our consolidated financial statements along with timing of our adoption of IFRS 16.

areas of change are the accounting for a) equity securities previously classified as available for sale and b) derivative instruments, which includes the accounting for hedging relationships that now qualify for hedge accounting and the exclusion of the time value component of options from hedging instruments.

i) Impact of Adoption on the Accounting for Equity Securities Previously Designated as Available for Sale

The revised policy on the accounting for Other Investments, which represent equity securities previously designated as available for sale, is described in note 2j. The adjustment to opening retained earnings on January 1, 2015 was $95 million with a corresponding adjustment to accumulated other comprehensive income. There was no impact on net loss for 2015.

ii) Impact of Adoption on Accounting for Derivative Instruments

We have reassessed all of our existing hedging relation-ships that qualified for hedge accounting under IAS 39 upon adoption of IFRS 9 and these have continued to qualify for hedge accounting under IFRS 9. We have also reassessed economic hedges that did not qualify for hedge accounting under IAS 39. IFRS 9 has enabled us to apply hedge accounting for most of our fuel positions, thus reducing the volatility of reported net income. These positions previously did not qualify for hedge accounting since component hedging was not permitted under IAS 39. We have applied these changes prospectively from January 1, 2015.

Under IFRS 9, we also began separating the intrinsic value and time value of option contracts and designating only the change in intrinsic value as the hedging instrument. IFRS 9 does not require restatement of comparatives. However, we have reflected the retrospective impact of the adoption of IFRS 9 relating to the change in accounting for time value of option contracts as an adjustment to opening retained earnings. The adjustment to opening retained earnings on January 1, 2015 was $4 million with a corresponding adjustment to accumulated other comprehensive income. There was no impact on net loss for 2015.

We recognize a financial asset or a financial liability when we become a party to the contractual provisions of the instrument. Financial assets are initially measured at fair value and are derecognized either when we have transferred substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership of the financial asset or when cash flows expire.

We classify and measure financial assets (excluding derivatives) on initial recognition as described below:



3 Critical Judgments, Estimates, Assumptions and Risks

Many of the amounts included in the consolidated balance sheet require management to make judgments and/or estimates. These judgments and estimates are continuously evaluated and are based on management’s experience and knowledge of the relevant facts and circumstances. Actual results may differ from the estimates. Information about such judgments and estimates is contained in the description of our accounting policies and/or other notes to the financial statements. The key areas where judgments, estimates and assumptions have been made are summarized below.

Life of Mine (“LOM”) Plans and Reserves and ResourcesEstimates of the quantities of proven and probable mineral reserves and mineral resources form the basis for our LOM plans, which are used for a number of important business and accounting purposes, including: the calculation of depreciation expense; the capitalization of production phase stripping costs; and forecasting the timing of the payments related to the environmental rehabilitation provision. In addition, the underlying LOM plans are used in the impairment tests for goodwill and non-current assets. In certain cases, these LOM plans have made assumptions about our ability to obtain the necessary permits required to complete the planned activities. We estimate our ore reserves and mineral resources based on information compiled by qualified persons as defined in accordance with the Canadian Securities Administrators’ National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects requirements. As at December 31, 2015, we have used a per ounce gold price of $1,000 short-term and $1,200 long-term to calculate our gold reserves, compared with $1,100 per ounce short- and long-term used as at December 31, 2014. Refer to notes 18 and 20.

Inventory The measurement of inventory including the determination of its net realizable value, especially as it relates to ore in stockpiles, involves the use of estimates. Estimation is required in determining the tonnage, recoverable gold and copper contained therein, and in determining the remaining costs of completion to bring inventory into its saleable form. Judgment also exists in determining whether to recognize a provision for obsolescence on mine operating supplies, and estimates are required to determine salvage or scrap value of supplies.

Impairment and Reversal of Impairment for Non-Current Assets and Impairment of GoodwillGoodwill and non-current assets are tested for impairment if there is an indicator of impairment, and in the case of goodwill, annually during the fourth quarter for all of our operating segments. Calculating the estimated fair values of CGUs for non-current asset impairment tests and CGUs or groups of CGUs for goodwill impairment tests requires management to make estimates and assumptions with respect to future production levels, operating and capital costs in our LOM plans, future metal prices, foreign exchange rates, Net Asset Value (“NAV”) multiples, value of reserves outside LOM plans in relation to the assumptions related to comparable entities and the market values per ounce and per pound and discount rates. Changes in any of the assumptions or estimates used in determining the fair values could impact the impairment analysis. Refer to notes 2n, 2p and 20 for further information.

Provisions for Environmental RehabilitationManagement assesses its provision for environmental rehabilitation on an annual basis or when new information becomes available. This assessment includes the estimation of the future rehabilitation costs, the timing of these expenditures, and the impact of changes in discount rates and foreign exchange rates. The actual future expenditures may differ from the amounts currently provided if the estimates made are significantly different than actual results or if there are significant changes in environmental and/or regulatory requirements in the future. Refer to notes 2u and 26 for further information.

TaxesManagement is required to make estimations regarding the tax basis of assets and liabilities and related deferred income tax assets and liabilities, amounts recorded for uncertain tax positions, the measurement of income tax expense and indirect taxes, and estimates of the timing of repatriation of earnings, which would impact the recognition of withholding taxes and taxes related to the outside basis on subsidiaries/associates. A number of these estimates require management to make estimates of future taxable profit, as well as the recoverability of indirect taxes, and if actual results are significantly different than our estimates, the ability to realize



expires on June 30, 2018. Barrick expects to apply for an extension of the 2018 deadline sometime in the next two years. We have also recorded $308 million in VAT recoverable in Argentina as of December 31, 2015 ($461 million, December 31, 2014) relating to the development of the Argentine side of the project. These amounts may not be recoverable if the project does not enter into production and are subject to devaluation risk as the amounts are recoverable in Argentinean pesos.

Streaming TransactionsThe upfront cash deposit received from Royal Gold on the gold and silver streaming transaction has been accounted for as deferred revenue as we have determined that it is not a derivative as it will be satisfied through the delivery of non-financial items (i.e., gold and silver) rather than cash or financial assets. It is our intention to settle the obligations under the streaming arrangement through our own production and if we were to fail to settle the obligations with Royal Gold through our own production, this would lead to the streaming arrangement becoming a derivative. This would cause a change to the accounting treatment, resulting in the revaluation of the fair value of the agreement through profit and loss on a recurring basis. Refer to note 24 for further details.

Our silver sale agreement with Silver Wheaton Corp (“Silver Wheaton”) requires us to deliver 25% of the life of mine silver production from the Pascua-Lama project once it is constructed and 100% of silver from Lagunas Norte, Pierina and Veladero mines until March 31, 2018. The completion date for Pascua-Lama was originally December 31, 2015 but was subsequently extended to June 30, 2020. Per the terms of the amended silver purchase agreement, if the requirements of the completion guarantee have not been satisfied by June 30, 2020, the agreement may be terminated by Silver Wheaton, in which case, they will be entitled to the return of the upfront cash consideration paid less credit for silver delivered up to the date of that event. The cash liability at December 31, 2015 is $313 million.

Refer to note 27 for a summary of our key financial risks.

the deferred tax assets and indirect tax receivables recorded on our balance sheet could be impacted. Refer to notes 2i, 11 and 29 for further information.

ContingenciesContingencies can be either possible assets or possible liabilities arising from past events which, by their nature, will only be resolved when one or more future events not wholly within our control occur or fail to occur. The assessment of such contingencies inherently involves the exercise of significant judgment and estimates of the outcome of future events. In assessing loss contingencies related to legal proceedings that are pending against us or unasserted claims that may result in such proceedings or regulatory or government actions that may negatively impact our business or operations, the Company with assistance from its legal counsel evaluates the perceived merits of any legal proceedings or unasserted claims or actions as well as the perceived merits of the nature and amount of relief sought or expected to be sought, when determining the amount, if any, to recognize as a contingent liability or assessing the impact on the carrying value of assets. Contingent assets are not recognized in the consolidated financial statements. Refer to note 35 for more information.

Pascua-Lama As a result of our decision to suspend the construction of our Pascua-Lama project, significant judgment and estimation has been used in determining our accrued liabilities, including: demobilization, contract claims and severance. For contractors, it is necessary to estimate accruals for work completed but not yet invoiced based on subjective assessments of the stage of completion of their work in relation to invoices rendered; and for costs arising from existing contracts for legal or constructive obligations arising from our demobilization actions. In addition, the Pascua-Lama project received $382 million (2014: $403 million) in value added tax (“VAT”) refunds in Chile relating to the development of the Chilean side of the project. Under the current arrangement this amount plus interest of $170 million (2014: $137 million) must be repaid if the project does not evidence exports for an amount of $3,538 million within a term that



Other Notes to the Financial Statements Note Page

Divestitures 4 120

Segment information 5 122

Revenue 6 125

Cost of sales 7 125

Exploration, evaluation and project expenses 8 127

Other expense (income) 9 127

General and administrative expenses 10 127

Income tax (recovery) expense 11 127

Loss per share 12 129

Finance costs 13 129

Cash flow – other items 14 129

Investments 15 130

Inventories 16 131

Accounts receivable and other current assets 17 132

Property, plant and equipment 18 133

Goodwill and other intangible assets 19 134

Impairment of goodwill and non-current assets 20 136

Other assets 21 141

Accounts payable 22 141

Other current liabilities 23 141

Financial instruments 24 141

Fair value measurements 25 150

Provisions 26 153

Financial risk management 27 153

Other non-current liabilities 28 156

Deferred income taxes 29 157

Capital stock 30 159

Non-controlling interests 31 160

Remuneration of key management personnel 32 161

Stock-based compensation 33 161

Post-retirement benefits 34 163

Contingencies 35 165

a) Disposition of 50 Percent Interest in Zaldívar MineOn December 1, 2015, we completed the sale of 50% of our Zaldívar copper mine in Chile to Antofagasta Plc for total consideration of $1.005 billion. We received $950 million upon closing of the transaction, net of $10 million for working capital items, $20 million being held in escrow pending finalization of working capital adjustment and the remaining $25 million will be received over the next five years. As the agreed selling price is lower than the previously recorded book values of the Zaldívar cash generating unit, we recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $427 million for the full year 2015. The transaction resulted in a loss of $16 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 based on movements in working capital from the date of announcement until the date of completing the transaction. The transaction remains subject to a net working capital adjustment period to complete the review of the working capital. The net working capital of Zaldívar (on a 100% basis) was $522 million as at December 1, 2015. We have determined that Zaldívar will be accounted for as a joint venture and upon closing we began accounting for our investment under the equity method. The purchase price allocation underlying our equity method investment and the ultimate gain/loss on disposition of our 50% of Zaldívar will be finalized when the working capital adjustment is finalized.

b) Divestments of Ruby Hill and Spring ValleyOn December 17, 2015, we closed the sale of our Ruby Hill mine and Spring Valley, a development stage project, for total cash consideration of $110 million. The transaction resulted in a gain of $110 million for the year ended December 31, 2015.

c) Assets Held-for-SaleOn November 11, 2015, we announced the sale of Bald Mountain and our remaining 50% interest in Round Mountain to Kinross for cash consideration of $610 million. The transaction was subject to customary closing conditions and closed on January 11, 2016. As at December 31, 2015, all of the assets and liabilities of Bald Mountain and our 50% interest in Round Mountain (refer to table below) were classified as held-for-sale. As the agreed selling price is lower than previously recorded book values, we recorded an impairment of $81 million in fourth quarter 2015.

4 Divestitures

For the year ended December 31 2015 2014

Gross cash proceeds on divesture Zaldívar $ 950 $ – Cowal 550 – Porgera 298 – Spring Valley 58 – Ruby Hill 52 – Marigold – 86 Kanowna – 67 Plutonic – 22 Other 2 –

$1,910 $ 175 Less: cash divested (6) (9)

$1,904 $ 166



consequently the assets and liabilities were written down to their fair value less costs of disposal, which resulted in an impairment loss of $514 million, including $316 million of goodwill recorded in 2014. Refer to note 20 for further details of the impairment loss.

Jabal Sayid is a joint arrangement which is structured through a separate entity of which Barrick is a 50% shareholder. The terms of the contractual arrangement provide that we have rights to 50% of the net earnings of the entity, and therefore we concluded that it was a joint venture and, as such, we account for our investment under the equity method.

f) Disposition of Australian AssetsOn January 31, 2014, we closed the sale of our Plutonic mine for total cash consideration of $22 million. In addition, on March 1, 2014, we completed the sale of our Kanowna mine for total cash consideration of $67 million. The transactions resulted in a loss of $5 million for the year ended December 31, 2014.

g) Disposition of 10 Percent Interest in AcaciaOn March 11, 2014, we completed the divestment of 41 million ordinary shares in Acacia, representing 10% of the issued ordinary share capital of Acacia for net cash proceeds of $186 million. Subsequent to the divestment, we continue to retain a controlling interest in Acacia and continue to consolidate Acacia. We have accounted for the divestment as an equity transaction and, accordingly, recorded the difference between the proceeds received and the carrying value of $179 million as $7 million of additional paid-in capital in shareholders’ equity.

h) Disposition of Marigold MineOn April 4, 2014, we completed the divestiture of our minority interest in the Marigold mine, for total cash consideration of $86 million. The transaction resulted in a gain of $21 million for the year ended December 31, 2014.

As at December 31 2015

Assets Current assets Inventories $ 149 Other current assets 1

Total current assets $ 150 Non-current assets Property, plant and equipment 605 Other 3

Total assets $ 758

Liabilities Current liabilities $ 40 Non-current liabilities Provisions and other 109

Total liabilities $ 149

d) Disposition of Cowal and 50 Percent Interest in Porgera Mines

On July 23, 2015, we completed the sale of our Cowal mine in Australia for cash consideration of $550 million. The transaction resulted in a gain of $34 million for the year ended December 31, 2015.

On August 31, 2015, we completed the sale of 50% of our interest in the Porgera mine in Papua New Guinea to Zijin Mining Group Company (“Zijin”) for cash consideration of $298 million. The transaction resulted in a gain of $39 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. Subsequent to completion of the transaction, we account for Porgera as a joint operation and include our share of Porgera’s assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses in our financial statements.

e) Disposition of 50 Percent Interest in Jabal SayidOn July 13, 2014, Barrick entered into an agreement to form a joint venture with Ma’aden to operate the Jabal Sayid copper project. Ma’aden, which is 50% owned by the Saudi Arabian government, acquired its 50% interest in the new joint venture company for cash consideration of $216 million. The transaction closed on December 3, 2014. The transaction resulted in a loss of control;



5 Segment Information

Barrick’s business is organized into fifteen individual minesites, one publicly traded company and one project. Barrick’s Chief Operating Decision Maker (“CODM”), the President, reviews the operating results, assesses performance and makes capital allocation decisions at the minesite, Company and/or project level. Therefore, each individual minesite and Acacia are operating segments for financial reporting purposes. For segment reporting purposes, we present our reportable operating segments as follows: eight individual gold mines, two individual copper mines, Acacia and our Pascua-Lama project. The remaining operating segments have been grouped into an “other” category consisting of our

remaining gold mines. The prior periods have been restated to reflect the change in presentation.

Segment performance is evaluated based on a number of measures including operating income before tax, production levels and unit production costs. Certain costs are managed on a consolidated basis and are therefore not reflected in segment income. Starting January 1, 2015, we transferred most of the functional services to minesites in order to hold the minesites directly accountable for the cost of the functional services they require to run their business, resulting in the allocation of our general and administration costs to individual minesites.

Consolidated Statements of Income Information

Cost of sales

Direct mining, Exploration, royalties and evaluation and Other Segment community project expenses incomeFor the year ended December 31, 2015 Revenue relations Depreciation expenses (income)1 (loss)

Goldstrike $ 1,143 $ 530 $ 192 $ 9 $ 4 $ 408 Cortez 1,129 483 343 2 14 287 Pueblo Viejo 1,332 627 277 2 1 425 Lagunas Norte 673 209 169 2 8 285 Veladero 720 391 108 2 3 216 Turquoise Ridge 235 118 23 – 2 92 Porgera 506 338 37 2 4 125 Kalgoorlie 358 233 74 2 4 45 Acacia 860 694 143 26 (2) (1) Lumwana 501 380 60 – 8 53 Zaldívar2 528 374 50 – – 104 Pascua-Lama – – 22 118 (9) (131) Other Mines3 1,060 658 247 5 (2) 152

$ 9,045 $5,035 $1,745 $170 $ 35 $ 2,060



Consolidated Statements of Income Information

Cost of sales

Direct mining, Exploration, royalties and evaluation and Other Segment community project expenses incomeFor the year ended December 31, 2014 Revenue relations Depreciation expenses (income)1 (loss)

Goldstrike $ 1,154 $ 519 $ 132 $ 1 $ 6 $ 496 Cortez 1,093 432 255 1 12 393 Pueblo Viejo 1,552 642 243 – (2) 669 Lagunas Norte 775 243 92 2 (1) 439 Veladero 894 438 116 3 7 330 Turquoise Ridge 252 94 17 1 1 139 Porgera 644 465 80 2 13 84 Kalgoorlie 417 267 42 1 1 106 Acacia 923 564 129 18 21 191 Lumwana 515 372 98 – 5 40 Zaldívar 711 415 73 1 (2) 224 Pascua-Lama – – 14 113 (12) (115) Other Mines3 1,282 785 304 54 (17) 156

$ 10,212 $ 5,236 $ 1,595 $ 197 $ 32 $ 3,152

1. Other expenses include accretion expense, which is included with finance costs in the consolidated statements of income. For the year ended December 31, 2015, accretion expense was $54 million (2014: $51 million). Refer to note 9a for details of other expenses (income).

2. Subsequent to its sale in December 2015, Zaldívar has been presented as pro rata for purposes of segment reporting. Total adjustments include $26 million to Revenues, $23 million to direct mining, royalties and community relations and $6 million to Amortization which otherwise would be included as losses from equity investees in the Other Mines segment.

3. Includes gold mines, exploration and evaluation expense and losses from equity investees that hold copper projects and mines.

Reconciliation of Segment Income to Loss from Continuing Operations Before Income Taxes


Segment income $ 2,060 $ 3,152 Other revenue1 10 27 Other cost of sales/amortization1,2 (156) 1 Exploration, evaluation and project expenses not attributable to segments (185) (195) General and administrative expenses (233) (385) Other (expense) income not attributable to segments 90 (5) Impairment charges (3,897) (4,106) Loss on currency translation (120) (132) Closed mine rehabilitation (3) (83) Finance income 13 11 Finance costs (includes non-segment accretion) (685) (745) Loss on non-hedge derivatives (38) (193)

Loss before income taxes $(3,144) $ (2,653)

1. Includes revenue and costs from Pierina until second quarter 2015, at which point it was presented as part of our operating segments.2. Includes all realized hedge gains/losses, where hedge accounting is applied.



Geographic Information Non-current assets Revenue1

As at Dec. 31, As at Dec. 31,

2015 2014 2015 2014

United States $ 7,375 $ 9,455 $ 3,076 $ 3,095 Dominican Republic 3,576 5,208 1,332 1,552 Argentina 2,177 2,517 720 894 Chile 2,020 3,711 502 711 Tanzania 1,648 1,717 860 923 Peru 627 1,045 734 801 Australia 518 1,155 552 821 Zambia 422 395 501 515 Papua New Guinea 342 668 506 644 Saudi Arabia 344 343 – – Canada 470 495 246 283 Unallocated 1,321 1,020 – –

Total $20,840 $ 27,729 $ 9,029 $ 10,239

1. Presented based on the location from which the product originated.

Capital Expenditures Information Segment capital expenditures1

For the year For the year ended Dec. 31, ended Dec. 31, 2015 2014

Goldstrike $ 160 $ 558 Cortez 148 189 Pueblo Viejo 102 134 Lagunas Norte 67 82 Veladero 242 173 Turquoise Ridge 32 30 Porgera 93 33 Kalgoorlie 34 66 Acacia 177 254 Lumwana 99 181 Zaldívar 85 111 Pascua-Lama (81) 195 Other Mines 235 189

Segment total $1,393 $ 2,195 Other items not allocated to segments 116 69

Total $1,509 $ 2,264

1. Segment capital expenditures are presented for internal management reporting purposes on an accrual basis. Capital expenditures in the consolidated statements of cash flow are presented on a cash basis. In 2015, cash expenditures were $1,713 million (2014: $2,432 million) and the decrease in accrued expenditures was $204 million (2014: $168 million decrease).



6 Revenue


Gold bullion sales1 Spot market sales $ 7,559 $ 8,471 Concentrate sales 254 273

$ 7,813 $ 8,744

Copper sales1 Copper cathode sales $ 501 $ 710 Concentrate sales 501 514

$ 1,002 $ 1,224

Other sales2 $ 214 $ 271

Total $ 9,029 $ 10,239

1. Revenues include amounts transferred from OCI to earnings for commodity cash flow hedges (see note 24d).

2. Revenues include the sale of by-products from our gold and copper mines and energy sales to third parties from our Monte Rio power plant in the Dominican Republic.

Principal ProductsAll of our gold mining operations produce gold in doré form, except Acacia’s gold mines of Bulyanhulu and Buzwagi, which produce both gold doré and gold concentrate. Gold doré is unrefined gold bullion bars usually consisting of 90% gold that is refined to pure gold bullion prior to sale to our customers. Concentrate is a processing product containing the valuable ore mineral from which most of the waste mineral has been eliminated. Our Lumwana mine produces a concentrate that primarily contains copper. At our Zaldívar mine we produce copper cathode, which consists of 99.9% copper.

Revenue Revenue is presented net of direct sales taxes of $34 million (2014: $48 million). Incidental revenues from the sale of by-products, primarily copper, silver and energy at our gold mines, are classified within other sales.

Provisional Copper and Gold SalesWe have provisionally priced sales for which price finalization, referenced to the relevant copper and gold index, is outstanding at the balance sheet date. Our exposure at December 31, 2015 to the impact of movements in market commodity prices for provisionally priced sales is set out in the following table: Impact on net income before taxation of 10% Volumes subject to movement in final pricing market price ($M)

As at December 31 2015 2014 2015 2014

Copper pounds (millions) 55 82 $11 $ 24 Gold ounces (000s) 16 28 2 3

For the year ended December 31, 2015, our provisionally priced copper sales included provisional pricing losses of $67 million (2014: $38 million loss) and our provisionally priced gold sales included provisional pricing losses of $3 million (2014: $1 million loss).

At December 31, 2015, our provisionally priced copper and gold sales subject to final settlement were recorded at average prices of $2.10/lb (2014: $2.88/lb) and $1,068/oz (2014: $1,201/oz), respectively. The sensitivities in the above tables have been determined as the impact of a 10% change in commodity prices at each reporting date, while holding all other variables, including foreign currency exchange rates, constant.

7 Cost of Sales


Direct mining cost1,2,3 $ 4,738 $ 4,803 Depreciation 1,771 1,648 Royalty expense 336 303 Community relations 62 76

Total $ 6,907 $ 6,830

1. Direct mining cost includes charges to reduce the cost of inventory to net realizable value of $285 million (2014: $121 million).

2. Direct mining cost includes the costs of extracting by-products.3. Includes employee costs of $1,302 million (2014: $1,381 million).



Cost of SalesCost of sales consists of direct mining costs (which include personnel costs, certain general and administrative costs, energy costs (principally diesel fuel and electricity), maintenance and repair costs, operating supplies, external services, third-party smelting and transport fees), depreciation related to sales, royalty expenses, and community relations expense at our operating sites. Cost of sales also includes costs associated with power sales to third parties from our Monte Rio power plant in the Dominican Republic. Cost of sales is based on the weighted average cost of contained or recoverable ounces sold and royalty expense for the period. Costs also include any impairment to reduce inventory to its net realizable value.

Beginning on January 1, 2015, we transferred most of the functional services to mine sites in order to hold the mine sites directly accountable for the cost of the functional services they require to run the business, resulting in the allocation of our general and administrative costs to individual mine sites. These costs now form part of mine site G&A costs, which are included within direct mining costs.

RoyaltiesCertain of our properties are subject to royalty arrangements based on mineral production at the properties. The primary type of royalty is a net smelter return (NSR) royalty. Under this type of royalty we pay the holder an amount calculated as the royalty percentage multiplied by the value of gold production at market gold prices less third-party smelting, refining and transportation costs. Other types of royalties include:

Net profits interest (NPI) royalty to other than a government,

Modified net smelter return (NSR) royalty, Net smelter return sliding scale (NSRSS) royalty, Gross proceeds sliding scale (GPSS) royalty, Gross smelter return (GSR) royalty, Net value (NV) royalty, Land tenement (LT) royalty, and a Gold revenue royalty.

Royalty expense is recorded on completion of the production or sales process.

Producing mines and projects Type of royalty

Goldstrike 0%–5% NSR, 0%–6% NPICortez 1.5% GSRCortez – Pipeline/South

Pipeline deposit 0.4%–9% GSRCortez – portion of Pipeline/

South Pipeline deposit 5% NVPueblo Viejo 3.2% NSR (for gold & silver)Lagunas Norte 2.51% NSRVeladero 3.75% gross proceedsPorgera 2% NSR, 0.25% otherKalgoorlie 2.5% of gold revenueAcacia Bulyanhulu 4% NSR North Mara – Nyabirama and

Nyabigena pit 4% NSR, 1% LT North Mara – Gokona pit 4% NSR, 1.1% LT Buzwagi 4% NSR, 30% NPI1

Pascua-Lama Project – Chile gold production 1.43%–9.56% GPSSPascua-Lama Project – Chile copper production 1.92% NSRPascua-Lama Project – Argentina production 3% modified NSROther Mines – Gold Williams 1.5% NSR, 0.75%–1% NV Hemlo – Interlake property 50% NPI, 3% NSR Round Mountain 3.53%–6.35% NSRSS2

Bald Mountain 3.5%–7% NSRSS, 2.9%–4% NSR, 10% NPI2

Other Mines – Copper Lumwana 6% GSR Jan to Dec 2014 20% GSR Jan to June 2015 9% GSR July to Dec 2015 Kabanga 4% NSR Other Cerro Casale 3% NSR (capped at $3 million

cumulative) Donlin Gold Project 1.5% NSR (first 5 years or until advance royalty is repaid), 4.5% NSR (thereafter), 8.0% NPI3

3% NPI, $0.4 cent mill tonnage fee

1. The NPI is calculated as a percentage of profits realized from the Buzwagi mine after all capital, exploration, and development costs and interest incurred in relation to the Buzwagi mine have been recouped and all operating costs relating to the Buzwagi mine have been paid. No amount is currently payable.

2. These mines have been disposed of on January 11, 2016.3. The NPI is calculated as a percentage of profits realized from the mine after

all funds invested to date with interest at an agreed upon rate are recovered. No amount is currently payable.



b) Impairment ChargesFor the years ended December 31 2015 2014

Impairment of non-current assets1 $ 1,726 $ 2,672 Impairment of other intangibles1 – 7

$ 1,726 $ 2,679 Impairment of goodwill1 2,171 1,409 Impairment of other investments – 18

Total $ 3,897 $ 4,106

1. Refer to note 20 for further details.

10 General and Administrative Expenses


Corporate administration2 $191 $ 217 Operating segment administration 42 168

Total1 $233 $ 385

1. Includes employee costs of $155 million (2014: $231 million).2. Includes $29 million (2014: $24 million) related to one-time severance payments.

11 Income Tax (Recovery) Expense


Tax on profit Current tax Charge for the year $ 476 $ 750 Adjustment in respect of prior years (71) (64)

$ 405 $ 686

Deferred tax Origination and reversal of temporary differences in the current year $(551) $ (436) Adjustment in respect of prior years 115 56

$(436) $ (380)

Income tax (recovery) expense $ (31) $ 306

Tax expense related to continuing operations

Current Canada $ 3 $ – International 402 686

$ 405 $ 686

Deferred Canada $ (32) $ (181) International (404) (199)

$(436) $ (380)


8 Exploration, Evaluation and Project Expenses


Exploration: Minesite exploration $ 34 $ 32 Global programs 109 131

$143 $ 163 Evaluation costs 20 21

Exploration and evaluation expense1 $ 163 $ 184 Advanced project costs: Pascua-Lama 117 88 Jabal Sayid – 30 Other project related costs: Cerro Casale 7 14 Kainantu – 4 Reko Diq 4 12 Corporate development 61 35 Community relations related to projects 3 25

Exploration, evaluation and project expenses $355 $ 392

1. Approximates the impact on operating cash flow.

9 Other Expense (Income)

a) Other Expense (Income)For the years ended December 31 2015 2014

Other Expense: Consulting fees $ 12 $ 28 Bank charges 19 16 Office closure costs 30 15 Toll milling 5 – Mine site severance and non-operational costs 27 12 World Gold Council fees – 3 Pension and other post-retirement benefits 3 3

Total other expense $ 96 $ 77

Other Income: Gain on sale of non-current assets/investments1 $(187) $ (52) Insurance recovery (3) (7) Management fee income (2) (5) Royalty income (4) (4) Incidental income (13) (23)

Total other income $ (209) $ (91)

Net other expense (income) $(113) $ (14)

1. 2015 includes gains of $110 million from the sale of Ruby Hill and Spring Valley, $39 million from the sale of Porgera, and $34 million from the sale of Cowal. 2014 includes gains of $21 million from the sale of Marigold and $5 million losses from the sale of Plutonic and Kanowna (see note 4).



De-recognition of a Deferred Tax AssetIn second quarter 2015, we recorded a deferred tax expense of $20 million related to de-recognition of a deferred tax asset in Pueblo Viejo.

Non-Recognition of US Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) CreditsIn fourth quarter 2015 and 2014, we recorded a deferred tax expense of $19 million and $43 million, respectively, related to US AMT credits which are not probable to be realized based on our current life of mine plans.

Tax Rate ChangesIn third quarter 2014, a tax rate change was enacted in Chile, resulting in current tax expense of $2 million.

In fourth quarter 2014, a tax rate change was enacted in Peru, reducing corporate income tax rates. This resulted in a deferred tax expense of $18 million due to recording the deferred tax asset in Peru at the lower rates.

Currency Translation Deferred tax balances are subject to remeasurement for changes in currency exchange rates each period. The most significant balances are Argentinean deferred tax liabilities. In 2015 and 2014, tax expense of $62 million and $46 million, respectively, primarily arose from translation losses due to the weakening of the Argentinean peso against the US dollar. These losses are included within deferred tax recovery/expense.

Internal RestructuresIn fourth quarter 2015, a deferred tax recovery of $116 million arose from a loss that was realized on internal restructuring of subsidiary corporations. This resulted in a net increase in deferred tax assets.

In second quarter 2014, a deferred tax recovery of $112 million arose from a restructure of internal debt to equity in subsidiary corporations, which resulted in the release of a deferred tax liability and a net increase in deferred tax assets.

Reconciliation to Canadian Statutory Rate


At 26.5% statutory rate $(833) $ (703) Increase (decrease) due to: Allowances and special tax deductions1 (103) (93) Impact of foreign tax rates2 (110) 18 Expenses not tax deductible 55 96 Goodwill impairment charges not tax deductible 736 373 Impairment charges not recognized in deferred tax assets 246 334 Net currency translation losses on deferred tax balances 62 46 Current year tax losses not recognized in deferred tax assets 56 20 Internal restructures (116) (112) De-recognition of a deferred tax asset 20 – Non-recognition of US AMT credits 19 43 Adjustments in respect of prior years 44 (8) Increase to income tax related contingent liabilities 13 – Impact of tax rate changes – 20 Other withholding taxes 12 40 Mining taxes (125) 227 Other items (7) 5


1. We are able to claim certain allowances and tax deductions unique to extractive industries that result in a lower effective tax rate.

2. We operate in multiple foreign tax jurisdictions that have tax rates different than the Canadian statutory rate.



12 Loss per Share

2015 2014For the years ended December 31($ millions, except shares in millions and per share amounts in dollars) Basic Diluted Basic Diluted

Net loss $ (3,113) $ (3,113) $ (2,959) $ (2,959) Net loss attributable to non-controlling interests 275 275 52 52

Net loss attributable to equity holders of Barrick Gold Corporation $ (2,838) $ (2,838) $ (2,907) $ (2,907)

Weighted average shares outstanding 1,165 1,165 1,165 1,165

Loss per share data attributable to the equity holders of Barrick Gold Corporation Net loss $ (2.44) $ (2.44) $ (2.50) $ (2.50)

13 Finance Costs


Interest $ 737 $ 733 Amortization of debt issue costs 19 21 Amortization of discount (premium) 3 (1) Loss (Gain) on interest rate hedges 2 (2) Interest capitalized1 (17) (30) Accretion 63 75 Gain on debt extinguishment2 (68) –

Total $ 739 $ 796

1. For the year ended December 31, 2015, the general capitalization rate was 5.80% (2014: 5.40%).

2. Gain arose from partial repayment of several notes during the year (2.50% notes due 2018, 3.85% notes due 2022, 4.10% notes due 2023 and 6.95% notes due 2019).

14 Cash Flow – Other Items

a) Operating Cash Flows – Other ItemsFor the years ended December 31 2015 2014

Adjustments for non-cash income statement items: Loss on currency translation $ 120 $ 132 RSU expense 16 8 Stock option expense (recovery) 2 (5) Loss from investment in equity investees (note 15) 7 – Change in estimate of rehabilitation costs at closed mines 3 83 Inventory impairment charges (note 16) 285 121 Cash flow arising from changes in: Accounts receivable 81 (24) Other current assets 10 (177) Accounts payable (35) (329) Other current liabilities (148) 141 Other assets and liabilities (237) (284) Settlement of rehabilitation obligations (89) (108)

Other net operating activities $ 15 $ (442)

b) Investing Cash Flows – Other ItemsFor the years ended December 31 2015 2014

Value added tax recoverable on project capital expenditures $ – $ (66) Other (17) (26)

Other net investing activities $(17) $ (92)

Investing cash flow includes payments for: Capitalized interest (note 24) $ 15 $ 29

c) Financing Cash Flows – Other ItemsFor the years ended December 31 2015 2014

Gain on debt extinguishment $ 68 $ – Derivative settlements – 9

Other net financing activities $ 68 $ 9



Summarized Equity Investee Financial Information Zaldívar

For the year ended December 31 2015

Revenue $51

Cost of sales (excluding depreciation) 46 Depreciation 12

Loss from continuing operations before tax $ (7)

Income tax recovery 1

Loss from continuing operations after tax $ (6) Other comprehensive loss –

Total comprehensive loss $ (6)

Summarized Balance Sheet Jabal Sayid Zaldívar

For the years ended December 31 2015 2014 2015

Cash and equivalents $ 6 $ 10 $ 17 Other current assets1 66 21 565

Total current asset $ 72 $ 31 $ 582

Non-current assets 452 429 1,640

Total assets $ 524 $ 460 $ 2,222

Current financial liabilities (excluding trade, other payables & provisions) $ – $ 3 $ – Other current liabilities 12 1 145

Total current liabilities $ 12 $ 4 $ 145

Non-current financial liabilities (excluding trade, other payables & provisions) – 2 7 Other non-current liabilities 401 343 60

Total non-current liabilities $ 401 $ 345 $ 67

Total liabilities $ 413 $ 349 $ 212

Net assets $ 111 $ 111 $ 2,010

1. Zaldívar other current assets include inventory of $471 million.

15 Investments

Equity Accounting Method Investment Continuity Kabanga Jabal Sayid Zaldívar GNX Total

At January 1, 2014 $ 27 $ – $ – $ – $ 27 Funds invested 1 178 – – 179

At December 31, 2014 $ 28 $ 178 $ – $ – $ 206 Funds invested 2 – – 5 7 Transfer to equity accounting method investment – – 993 – 993 Loss from equity investees – – (3) (4) (7)

At December 31, 2015 $ 30 $ 178 $ 990 $ 1 $ 1,199

Publicly traded No No No No

The information above reflects the amounts presented in the financial information of the joint venture adjusted for differences between IFRS and local GAAP.

Reconciliation of Summarized Financial Information to Carrying Value Jabal Sayid Zaldívar

Opening net assets $ 111 $ 2,010 Loss for the period – (6)

Closing net assets, December 31 $ 111 $ 2,004

Barrick’s share of net assets (50%) 55 1,002 Working capital adjustments – (12) Goodwill recognition 123 –

Carrying value $ 178 $ 990



16 Inventories

Gold Copper

As at As at As at As at Dec. 31, Dec. 31, Dec. 31, Dec. 31, 2015 2014 2015 2014

Raw materials Ore in stockpiles $1,912 $ 2,036 $48 $ 182 Ore on leach pads 292 357 – 392 Mine operating supplies 633 875 74 132 Work in process 210 245 – 7 Finished products Gold doré 32 129 – – Copper cathode – – – 12 Copper concentrate – – 8 28 Gold concentrate 10 11 – –

$3,089 $ 3,653 $130 $ 753 Non-current ore in stockpiles1 (1,494) (1,584) (8) (100)

$1,595 $ 2,069 $122 $ 653

1. Ore that we do not expect to process in the next 12 months is classified within other long-term assets.


Inventory impairment charges1 $285 $ 121

1. Impairment charges in 2015 primarily relate to production costs exceeding net realizable value at Cortez, stockpile and supplies impairments at Buzwagi as well as mine operating supplies obsolescence across the sites.

Ore on Leach PadsThe recovery of gold and copper from certain oxide ores is achieved through the heap leaching process. Our Pierina, Lagunas Norte, Veladero, Cortez, Bald Mountain and Round Mountain mines all use a heap leaching process for gold and 50% owned Zaldívar mine uses a heap leaching process for copper. Under this method, ore is placed on leach pads where it is treated with a chemical solution, which dissolves the gold or copper contained in the ore. The resulting “pregnant” solution is further processed in a plant where the gold or copper is recovered. For accounting purposes, costs are added to ore on leach pads based on current mining and leaching costs, including applicable depreciation, depletion and amortization relating to mining operations. Costs are removed from ore on leach pads as ounces or pounds are recovered based on the average cost per recoverable ounce of gold or pound of copper on the leach pad.

Estimates of recoverable gold or copper on the leach pads are calculated from the quantities of ore placed on the leach pads (measured tons added to the leach pads), the grade of ore placed on the leach pads (based on assay data) and a recovery percentage (based on ore type).

Although the quantities of recoverable gold or copper placed on the leach pads are reconciled by comparing the grades of ore placed on pads to the quantities of gold or copper actually recovered (metallurgical balancing), the nature of the leaching process inherently limits the ability to precisely monitor inventory levels. As a result, the metallurgical balancing process is regularly monitored and estimates are refined based on actual results over time. Historically, our operating results have not been materially impacted by variations between the estimated and actual recoverable quantities of gold or copper on our leach pads.



At December 31, 2015, the weighted average cost per recoverable ounce of gold on leach pads was $596 per ounce (2014: $687 per ounce of gold and $1.24 per pound of copper). Variations between actual and estimated quantities resulting from changes in assumptions and estimates that do not result in write-downs to net realizable value are accounted for on a prospective basis.

The ultimate recovery of gold or copper from a leach pad will not be known until the leaching process is concluded. Based on current mine plans, we expect to place the last ton of ore on our current leach pads at dates for gold ranging from 2016 to 2028. Including the estimated time required for residual leaching, rinsing and reclamation activities, we expect that our leaching operations will terminate within a period of up to 6 years following the date that the last ton of ore is placed on the leach pad.

The current portion of ore inventory on leach pads is determined based on estimates of the quantities of gold or copper at each balance sheet date that we expect to recover during the next 12 months.

Ore in Stockpiles

As at As at Dec. 31, Dec. 31, 2015 2014

Gold Goldstrike $ 906 $ 760 Pueblo Viejo 406 340 Porgera 77 257 Cortez 179 159 Cowal – 176 Kalgoorlie 113 103 Buzwagi 38 69 North Mara 48 43 Lagunas Norte 80 54 Veladero 34 32 Turquoise Ridge 20 18 Other 11 25 Copper Zaldívar – 108 Lumwana 48 74

$1,960 $ 2,218

Ore on Leach Pads

As at As at Dec. 31, Dec. 31, 2015 2014

Gold Veladero $136 $ 149 Cortez 71 40 Bald Mountain – 108 Round Mountain – 21 Lagunas Norte 81 37 Pierina 4 2 Copper Zaldívar – 392

$292 $ 749

Purchase CommitmentsAt December 31, 2015, we had purchase obligations for supplies and consumables of approximately $1,151 million (2014: $1,154 million).

17 Accounts Receivable and Other Current Assets

As at As at Dec. 31, Dec. 31, 2015 2014

Accounts receivable Amounts due from concentrate sales $ 76 $ 98 Amounts due from copper cathode sales – 86 Receivable from Dominican Republic government2 47 109 Working capital adjustments held in escrow 20 – Other receivables 132 125

$275 $ 418

Other current assets Derivative assets (note 24f) $ – $ 7 Goods and services taxes recoverable1 199 208 Prepaid expenses 46 62 Other 18 34

$263 $ 311

1. Primarily includes VAT and fuel tax recoverables of $56 million in Argentina, $56 million in Tanzania, $18 million in the Dominican Republic, $44 million in Chile, and $9 million in Peru (Dec. 31, 2014: $84 million, $44 million, $33 million, $24 million and $8 million, respectively).

2. Amounts receivable from the Dominican Republic government primarily relate to payments made by Pueblo Viejo on behalf of the government.



18 Property, Plant and Equipment

Mining Mining property property costs costs not Buildings, plant subject to subject to and equipment depreciation1,3 depreciation1,2 Total

At January 1, 2015 Net of accumulated depreciation $ 6,683 $ 8,264 $ 4,246 $ 19,193

Additions4 (20) 225 1,048 1,253 Capitalized interest – 17 – 17 Disposals (904) (734) (55) (1,693) Depreciation (1,030) (954) – (1,984) Impairment charges (1,041) (236) (470) (1,747) Transfers5 1,203 1,062 (2,265) – Assets held-for-sale (207) (344) (54) (605)

At December 31, 2015 $ 4,684 $ 7,300 $ 2,450 $ 14,434

At December 31, 2015

Cost $ 13,782 $ 19,968 $ 14,734 $ 48,484 Accumulated depreciation and impairments (9,098) (12,668) (12,284) (34,050)

Net carrying amount – December 31, 2015 $ 4,684 $ 7,300 $ 2,450 $ 14,434

Mining Mining property property costs costs not Buildings, plant subject to subject to and equipment depreciation1,3 depreciation1,2 Total

At January 1, 2014 Cost $ 13,817 $ 20,769 $ 16,602 $ 51,188 Accumulated depreciation and impairments (7,607) (12,218) (9,675) (29,500)

Net carrying amount – January 1, 2014 $ 6,210 $ 8,551 $ 6,927 $ 21,688

Additions4 190 301 2,048 2,539 Capitalized interest – 2 28 30 Disposals (36) (15) (523) (574) Depreciation (933) (891) – (1,824) Impairment charges (105) (422) (2,139) (2,666) Transfers5 1,357 738 (2,095) –

At December 31, 2014 $ 6,683 $ 8,264 $ 4,246 $ 19,193

At December 31, 2014

Cost $ 15,273 $ 21,803 $ 16,060 $ 53,136 Accumulated depreciation and impairments (8,590) (13,539) (11,814) (33,943)

Net carrying amount – December 31, 2014 $ 6,683 $ 8,264 $ 4,246 $ 19,193

1. Includes capitalized reserve acquisition costs, capitalized development costs and capitalized exploration and evaluation costs other than exploration license costs included in intangible assets.

2. Assets not subject to depreciation includes construction-in-progress, projects and acquired mineral resources and exploration potential at operating mine sites and development projects.

3. Assets subject to depreciation includes the following items for production stage properties: acquired mineral reserves and resources, capitalized mine development costs, capitalized stripping and capitalized exploration and evaluation costs.

4. Additions include revisions to the capitalized cost of closure and rehabilitation activities. 5. Primarily relates to long-lived assets that are transferred to PP&E once they are placed into service.



prospectively revise calculations of amortization expense for property, plant and equipment amortized using the UOP method, where the denominator is our LOM ounces. The effect of changes in our LOM on amortization expense for 2015 was a $94 million decrease (2014: $201 million increase). The effect of changes in our LOM on amortization expense for fourth quarter 2015 was a $56 million decrease (2014: $57 million increase).

c) Capital Commitments and Operating LeasesIn addition to entering into various operational commitments in the normal course of business, we had commitments of approximately $120 million at December 31, 2015 (2014: $159 million) for construction activities at our sites and projects.

Operating leases are recognized as an operating cost in the consolidated statements of income on a straight-line basis over the lease term. At December 31, 2015, we have operating lease commitments totaling $161 million, of which $36 million is expected to be paid within a year, $95 million is expected to be paid within two to five years and the remaining amount to be paid beyond five years.

a) Mineral Property Costs Not Subject to Depreciation Carrying Carrying amount at amount at Dec. 31, Dec. 31, 2015 2014

Construction-in-progress1 $ 529 $ 1,490 Acquired mineral resources and exploration potential 42 264 Projects Pascua-Lama 1,287 1,910 Cerro Casale2 444 444 Donlin Gold 148 138

$ 2,450 $ 4,246

1. Represents assets under construction at our operating mine sites.2. Amounts are presented on a 100% basis and include our partner’s

non-controlling interest.

b) Changes in Gold and Copper Mineral Life of Mine Plan

As part of our annual business cycle, we prepare updated estimates of proven and probable gold and copper mineral reserves and the portion of resources considered probable of economic extraction for each mineral property. This forms the basis for our LOM plans. We

19 Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets

a) Goodwill Closing balance Closing balance December 31, December 31, 2013 Impairments Reallocation1 Disposals 2014

Goldstrike $ 730 $ – $ – $ – $ 730 Cortez 869 – – – 869 Pueblo Viejo 412 – – – 412 Lagunas Norte 247 – – – 247 Veladero 195 – – – 195 North America Portfolio 758 – (758) – – Turquoise Ridge – – 528 – 528 Hemlo – – 63 – 63 Bald Mountain – (131) 131 – – Round Mountain – (36) 36 – – Australia Pacific 206 – (206) – – Kalgoorlie – – 71 – 71 Cowal – – 64 – 64 Porgera – – 71 – 71 Copper2 2,418 (316) (2,102) – – Zaldívar – (712) 1,888 – 1,176 Lumwana – (214) 214 – –

Total $ 5,835 $ (1,409) $ – $ – $ 4,426

1. As a result of the reorganization of our operating segments in November 2014, we reallocated goodwill, which had previously been recorded in our North America Portfolio, Australia Pacific and Copper Operating Units on a relative fair value basis. The reorganized operating segments were then tested for impairment (see note 20).

2. In second quarter 2014 we reclassified Jabal Sayid to held-for-sale pending the sale of 50% to our joint venture partner. As a result, we recorded an impairment of goodwill of $316 million.



Opening balance Closing balance January 1, December 31, 2015 Impairments Reallocation Disposals 2015

Goldstrike $ 730 $ (730) $ – $ – $ – Cortez 869 (355) – – 514 Pueblo Viejo 412 (412) – – – Lagunas Norte 247 (247) – – – Veladero 195 – – – 195 Turquoise Ridge 528 – – – 528 Hemlo 63 – – – 63 Kalgoorlie 71 – – – 71 Cowal 64 – – (64) – Porgera 71 – – (71) – Zaldívar 1,176 (427) – (749) –

Total $ 4,426 $ (2,171) $ – $ (884) $ 1,371

On a total basis, the gross amount and accumulated impairment losses are as follows:

Cost $ 8,659

Accumulated impairment losses January 1, 2014 (3,708) Impairment losses 2014 (1,409) Impairment losses 2015 (2,171)

Accumulated impairment losses December 31, 2015 (7,288)

Net carrying amount December 31, 2015 $ 1,371

b) Intangible Assets Water Supply Exploration rights1 Technology2 contracts3 potential4 Total

Opening balance January 1, 2014 $ 116 $ 16 $ 20 $ 168 $ 320

Additions – – – – – Amortization and impairment losses – (2) (3) (7) (12)

Closing balance December 31, 2014 $ 116 $ 14 $ 17 $ 161 $ 308

Additions – – – – – Disposals (29) – – (5) (34) Amortization and impairment losses – (2) (1) – (3)

Closing balance December 31, 2015 $ 87 $ 12 $ 16 $ 156 $ 271

Cost $ 116 $ 17 $ 39 $ 467 $ 639 Accumulated amortization and impairment losses – (3) (22) (306) (331)

Net carrying amount December 31, 2014 $ 116 $ 14 $ 17 $ 161 $ 308

Cost $ 116 $ 17 $ 39 $ 283 $ 455 Disposals (29) – – (5) (34) Accumulated amortization and impairment losses – (5) (23) (122) (150)

Net carrying amount December 31, 2015 $ 87 $ 12 $ 16 $ 156 $ 271

1. Relates to water rights in South America, which are subject to annual impairment testing and will be amortized through cost of sales when we begin using these in the future.

2. The amount is amortized through cost of sales using the UOP method over LOM ounces of the Pueblo Viejo mine, with no assumed residual value.3. Relates to a supply agreement with Michelin North America Inc. to secure a supply of tires and is amortized over the effective term of the contract through

cost of sales.4. Exploration potential consists of the estimated fair value attributable to exploration licenses acquired as a result of a business combination or asset acquisition.

The carrying value of the licenses will be transferred to PP&E when the development of attributable mineral resources commences (note 2m(i)). See note 20 for details of impairment charges recorded against exploration assets.




Pueblo Viejo $ 1,112 $ (9) Pascua-Lama 399 382 Bald Mountain/Round Mountain1 81 – Buzwagi 37 – Lagunas Norte 36 – Oil Royalty 36 – Cortez 2 46 Cerro Casale – 1,476 Lumwana – 720 Jabal Sayid – 198 Other investments – 18 Exploration (Tusker, Kainantu, Saudi Licenses) – 7 Porgera – (160) Other 23 19

Total non-current asset impairment losses $ 1,726 $ 2,697

Goldstrike $ 730 $ – Zaldívar 427 712 Pueblo Viejo 412 – Cortez 355 – Lagunas Norte 247 – Jabal Sayid – 316 Lumwana – 214 Bald Mountain – 131 Round Mountain – 36

Total goodwill impairment losses $ 2,171 $ 1,409

Total impairment losses $ 3,897 $ 4,106

1. As discussed in note 4c, we have disposed of Bald Mountain and Round Mountain in a single transaction. Accordingly, the impairment loss has been calculated together.

2015 Indicators of ImpairmentFourth Quarter 2015 In fourth quarter 2015, as per our policy, we performed our annual goodwill impairment test. Primarily as a result of the lower gold price assumptions used in this year’s test which are consistent with current market conditions, we identified that the carrying values of our Pueblo Viejo, Goldstrike, Cortez and Lagunas Norte mines exceeded their FVLCD. At Pueblo Viejo, a goodwill impairment loss of $412 million and a non-current asset

In accordance with our accounting policy, goodwill is tested for impairment in the fourth quarter and also when there is an indicator of impairment. Non-current assets are tested for impairment when events or changes in circumstances suggest that the carrying amount may not be recoverable.

When there is an indicator of impairment of non-current assets within an operating segment consisting of a CGU that does not contain goodwill, we test the non-current assets for impairment and recognize any impairment loss on the non-current assets. When there is an indicator of impairment of non-current assets within an operating segment that contains goodwill, we test the non-current assets for impairment first and recognize any impairment loss on goodwill first and then any remaining impairment loss is applied against the non-current assets.

An impairment loss is recognized when the carrying amount exceeds the recoverable amount. The recoverable amount of each operating segment for goodwill testing purposes has been determined based on its estimated FVLCD, which has been determined to be greater than the VIU amounts. The recoverable amount for non-current asset testing is calculated using the same approach as for goodwill; however, the assessment is done at the CGU level, which is the lowest level for which identifiable cash flows are largely independent of the cash flows of other assets. A CGU is generally an individual operating mine or development project.

Summary of Impairments (Reversals)For the year ended December 31, 2015, we recorded impairment losses of $1.7 billion (2014: $2.7 billion) for non-current assets and $2.2 billion (2014: $1.4 billion) for goodwill, as summarized in the following table:

20 Impairment of Goodwill and Non-Current Assets



recorded on our Lumwana mine in fourth quarter 2014. In third quarter 2015, we evaluated the FVLCD and concluded that, based on the current mine plan, lower short-term copper prices and a higher observable discount rate offset the lower royalty rate. Therefore no reversal of impairment was required at that time.

As at September 30, 2015, all of the assets and liabilities of Zaldívar were classified as held-for-sale as the transaction will result in a loss of control. The agreed selling price was lower than our previous assessment of FVLCD due to lower short-term copper prices, the impact of 10 months’ worth of production on the fair value and an increase in observable discount rates. For the year ended December 31, 2015 we recorded a goodwill impairment loss of $427 million as a result of this transaction.

In third quarter 2015, a net reversal of $16 million was recognized relating to the termination of contracts of certain leased assets at Pascua-Lama that had previously been impaired. They are now carried at their expected realizable value.

Second Quarter 2015In second quarter 2015, we determined that we expect to sell the Monte Rio power asset at our Pueblo Viejo mine. Power supply to Pueblo Viejo is not impacted by this disposition. In third quarter 2015, we entered into an agreement to sell the asset and recorded a partial reversal of this impairment based on the agreed upon sales price. For the year ended December 31, 2015, we recorded an impairment loss of $11 million to reduce its carrying value down to its net realizable value.

2014 Indicators of ImpairmentIn second quarter 2014, our Jabal Sayid project in Saudi Arabia met the criteria as an asset held-for-sale. Accordingly, we were required to allocate goodwill from the Copper Operating Unit to Jabal Sayid and test the Jabal Sayid group of assets for impairment. We determined that the carrying value exceeded the FVLCD, and consequently recorded $514 million in impairment charges, including the full amount of goodwill allocated on a relative fair value basis, of $316 million. The recoverable amount after the impairment, based on FVLCD, was $560 million. In fourth quarter 2014, we closed a transaction to sell a 50 percent interest of Jabal Sayid for cash proceeds of $216 million.

We reached an agreement to sell a power-related asset at our Pueblo Viejo mine for proceeds that exceeded its carrying value. This asset had previously

impairment loss of $1,101 million was recorded and the recoverable amount after the impairment, based on the mine’s FVLCD, was $3.2 billion (100% basis). At Goldstrike, a goodwill impairment loss of $730 million was recorded and the recoverable amount after the impairment, based on the mine’s FVLCD, was $2.7 billion. At Cortez, a goodwill impairment loss of $355 million was recorded and the recoverable amount after the impairment, based on the mine’s FVLCD, was $3.4 billion. At Lagunas Norte, a goodwill impairment loss of $247 million and a non-current asset impairment loss of $36 million was recorded and the recoverable amount after the impairment, based on the mine’s FVLCD, was $480 million. Refer to note 19 for our remaining goodwill balances.

As at December 31, 2015, all of the assets and liabilities of Bald Mountain and Round Mountain were classified as held-for-sale. As the agreed selling price is lower than previously recognized carrying values, we recorded a non-current asset impairment loss of $81 million.

Throughout fourth quarter 2015, the trading price of the Company’s shares declined such that the carrying value of our net assets exceeded our market capitalization. We have determined that this is an indicator of impairment and tested the remaining assets that were not included in the annual goodwill impairment test. As a result, we determined two additional impairments. At our Pascua-Lama project, we recorded an impairment loss of $404 million (net of a $46 million reversal related to a specific PP&E asset). The recoverable amount after the impairment, based on the project’s FVLCD, was $810 million. At our Buzwagi mine in Tanzania (part of our Acacia subsidiary), we recorded a non-current asset impairment loss of $37 million. The recoverable amount after the impairment, based on the mine’s FVLCD, was $81 million (100% basis).

We evaluated the FVLCD of an oil royalty that we received as part of the consideration for one of the Barrick Energy dispositions in 2013 and concluded that due to the significant decline in current oil prices in fourth quarter 2015 and the corresponding constraints on capital investment in the oil industry, its carrying value was not recoverable. We recorded an impairment of $36 million and reduced its carrying value to nil.

Third Quarter 2015In July 2015, the Zambian government passed legislation that amended the country’s mining tax regime. This was an indicator of potential reversal of previous impairments



of return above our hurdle rate for a project of this size and complexity. As a result, the budget for 2015 for the project was significantly reduced, with the 2015 budget focused on preserving the optionality of the project. We will continue activities to protect the asset and assess alternative ways to develop the project in a more economic manner; however, management’s expectation of achieving a suitable rate of return in the metal price environment has been diminished. The foregoing developments were deemed to be indicators of impairment, and as a result, we assessed the recoverable amount of the project and have recorded an impairment loss on the project of $1,467 million. The recoverable amount after the impairment, based on the project’s estimated FVLCD, was $500 million (100% basis).

In December 2014, the Chilean Supreme Court declined to consider Barrick’s appeal of the Environmental Court Decision on Pascua-Lama on procedural grounds (see note 35). As a result, the Superintendencia del Medio Ambiente (“SMA”) will now re-evaluate the resolution. Although we cannot reasonably predict the outcome of the resolution, this risk, in combination with the decrease in our long-term silver price assumption in fourth quarter 2014 due to declining market prices, and the continued uncertainty about the timing, cost and permitting of the project, were deemed to be indicators of impairment. As a result, we assessed the recoverable amount of the project and have recorded an impairment loss on Pascua-Lama of $382 million. The recoverable amount after the impairment, based on the project’s estimated FVLCD, was $1,200 million, which is equal to the project’s carrying value at the start of the year.

At our Porgera mine in Papua New Guinea, we have revised our LOM plan to include a portion of the open pit resources that were removed from the plan in the prior year. In 2013, we did not have a feasible plan to access the open pit reserves due to technical and financial issues with respect to the west wall of the open pit. In 2014, management resolved these technical issues and developed an optimized mine plan to sequence the west wall cutback in an economical manner. As a result, management was able to bring a significant portion of the ounces from the open pit back into the LOM plan. The new plan resulted in an increase in the estimated mine life from 8 to 12 years, and an increase in the estimated FVLCD of the mine, which has resulted in a partial reversal of a previous impairment loss of $160 million. The recoverable amount after the impair-ment reversal, based on FVLCD, was $600 million.

been impaired in fourth quarter 2012, and therefore we recognized an impairment reversal of $9 million. This transaction closed on September 30, 2014.

In fourth quarter 2014, as described in note 19, we reorganized our internal management reporting structure. As a result, the goodwill attributable to our former North America Portfolio, Australia Pacific and Copper segments was allocated to the individual CGUs within those operating segments on a relative fair value basis. The allocation of goodwill to the carrying value of our Bald Mountain and Round Mountain CGUs resulted in their carrying values exceeding their FVLCD and, as a result, we recorded goodwill impairment losses of $131 million and $36 million, respectively. The recoverable amounts after the impairment of Bald Mountain and Round Mountain, based on FVLCD, were $482 million and $131 million, respectively.

On December 18, 2014, the Zambian government passed changes to the country’s mining tax regime that would replace the current corporate income tax and variable profit tax with a 20 percent royalty which took effect on January 1, 2015. The application of a 20 percent royalty rate compared to the 6 percent royalty rate the Company was paying has a significant negative impact on the expected future cash flows of our Lumwana mine and was considered an indicator of impairment. As a result, we conducted an impairment test and as a result of the new royalty rate along with the decrease in our copper price assumptions, recorded $930 million in impairment charges, including the full amount of goodwill of $214 million allocated to Lumwana as a result of the change in segments (see note 19). The recoverable amount after the impairment, based on FVLCD, was $300 million.

Our Zaldívar mine experienced a significant decrease in the estimated FVLCD of the mine, primarily as a result of the decrease in fourth quarter 2014 of our forecast of the long-term copper price and, to a lesser extent, as a result of the final assessment of the tax rate increase in Chile. Accordingly, we recorded a goodwill impairment loss of $712 million on this CGU. The recoverable amount after the impairment, based on FVLCD, was $2,411 million.

In November 2014, we completed a strategy optimization study for our Cerro Casale project with the goal of identifying a development model that would improve the project economics and risk by reducing the upfront capital requirements in order to generate a higher return on our investment. The study was unable to identify an alternative that provided an overall rate



find and produce more metal than what is currently included in the LOM plan or reserve and resource estimates, and the benefit of gold price optionality. As a result, we applied a specific NAV multiple to the NPV of each CGU within each gold segment based on the NAV multiples observed in the market in recent periods and that we judged to be appropriate to the CGU.

Pascua-Lama and Cerro CasaleThe FVLCD for Pascua-Lama and Cerro Casale was determined by considering observable market values for comparable assets expressed as dollar per ounce and dollar per pound of proven and probable reserves (level 3 of the fair value hierarchy). We used the market approach as the LOMs for Pascua-Lama and Cerro Casale have significant uncertainty with respect to the estimated timeline for the project and the estimated remaining construction costs. The observable market values were adjusted, where appropriate, for country risk if the comparable asset was in a different country and any change in metal prices since the valuation date of the comparable asset.

CopperFor our copper operating segments, the FVLCD for each of the CGUs was determined based on the NPV of future cash flows expected to be generated using the most recent LOM plans (level 3 of the fair value hierarchy). Based on observable market or publicly available data including spot and forward prices and equity sell-side analyst consensus, we make an assumption of future copper prices to estimate future revenues. The future cash flows for each copper mine were discounted using a WACC depending on the location and market risk factors for each mine.

Our gold price assumptions used in our 2015 impairment testing are 2016: $1,000, 2017: $1,100 and 2018+: $1,200. In fourth quarter 2015, market consensus prices ranged from $1,000 to $1,250 in the short term and $800 to $1,300 in the long term. Consequently, our gold price assumptions are consistent with the assumptions a market participant would use to value a gold mining property. In 2014, impairment test gold prices were $1,250 for 2015–2016 and $1,300 for 2017 onwards.

The annual update to the LOM plan at Cortez resulted in a cessation of mining in one of the open pits at the mine. This was identified as an indicator of impairment, resulting in the impairment of assets specifically related to this pit of $46 million.

Key AssumptionsThe key assumptions and estimates used in determining the FVLCD are related to commodity prices, discount rates, NAV multiples for gold assets, operating costs, exchange rates, capital expenditures, the LOM production profile, continued license to operate, evidence of value from current year disposals and for our projects the expected start of production. In addition, assumptions are related to observable market evaluation metrics, including identification of comparable entities, and associated market values per ounce and per pound of reserves and/or resources, as well as the valuation of resources beyond what is included in LOM plans.

GoldFor the gold segments, excluding Pascua-Lama and Cerro Casale, FVLCD for each of the CGUs was determined by calculating the net present value (“NPV”) of the future cash flows expected to be generated by the mines and projects within the segments (level 3 of the fair value hierarchy). The estimates of future cash flows were derived from the most recent LOM plans and, where the LOM plans excludes a material portion of total reserves and resources, we assign value to reserves and resources not considered in these models. Based on observable market or publicly available data, including forward prices and equity sell-side analyst forecasts, we make an assumption of future gold and silver prices to estimate future revenues. The future cash flows for each gold mine are discounted using a real weighted average cost of capital (“WACC”), which reflects specific market risk factors for each mine. Some gold companies trade at a market capitalization greater than the NPV of their expected cash flows. Market participants describe this as a “NAV multiple”, which represents the multiple applied to the NPV to arrive at the trading price. The NAV multiple is generally understood to take account of a variety of additional value factors such as the exploration potential of the mineral property, namely the ability to



The results of this analysis are as follows:

Impairment based onOperating Impairment Gold price Gold price segment recorded +$100 -$100

Pueblo Viejo Goodwill $ 412 $ – $ 412 Non-current assets 1,101 – 2,519 Lagunas Norte Goodwill 247 65 247 Non-current assets 36 – 321 Goldstrike Goodwill 730 – 730 Non-current assets – – 1,088 Cortez Goodwill 355 – 869 Non-current assets – – 735 Buzwagi non-current assets 37 25 42 Veladero goodwill – – 112 Turquoise Ridge goodwill – – 316

We also performed a sensitivity analysis on our WACC, which is another key input that impacts the impairment calculations. We assumed a +/-10% change on the WACC, while holding all other assumptions constant, to determine the impact on impairment losses recorded, and whether any additional operating segments would be impacted. The results of this analysis are as follows:

Impairment based onOperating Impairment WACC WACC segment recorded +10% -10%

Pueblo Viejo Goodwill $ 412 $ 412 $ 412 Non-current assets 1,101 1,333 843 Lagunas Norte Goodwill 247 247 247 Non-current assets 36 51 – Buzwagi non-current assets 37 37 37 Goldstrike goodwill 730 730 647 Cortez goodwill 355 447 –

In addition, for our Cerro Casale and Pascua-Lama projects, we have determined our valuation based on a market approach. The key assumption that impacts the impairment calculations, should there be an indication of impairment for these CGUs, is the value per ounce of gold and per pound of copper based on an analysis of comparable companies. We assumed a negative 10% change for the assumption of gold, silver and copper value per unit, while holding all other assumptions

The other key assumptions used in our impairment testing are summarized in the table below: 2015 2014

Silver price per oz (long-term) $ 19 $ 21 Copper price per lb (long-term) $ 3.00 $ 3.00 WACC – gold (range) 3%–8% 3%–8% WACC – gold (avg) 4% 5% WACC – copper (range) 7% 7%–9% WACC – copper (avg) 7% 7% NAV multiple – gold (avg) 1.1 1.1 LOM years – gold (avg)1 18 12Value per ounce of gold2 $45–$70 $45–$80 Value per ounce of silver2 $0.71–$1.11 $0.73–$1.29 Value per pound of copper2 $0.03–$0.04 $0.05–$0.06

1. The average LOM years is longer in 2015 as a result of the disposition of some of our shorter life mines and extensions in mine life of some of our remaining assets.

2. The value per ounce/pound used is dependent on the characteristics of the property being valued.

SensitivitiesShould there be a significant decline in commodity prices, we would take actions to assess the implications on our life of mine plans, including the determination of reserves and resources, and the appropriate cost structure for the operating segments. The recoverable amount of the CGUs would also be impacted by other market factors such as changes in net asset value multiples and the value per ounce/pound of comparable market entities.

We performed a sensitivity analysis on the gold price, which is the key assumption that impacts the impairment calculations. We assumed a $100 per ounce change in our gold price assumptions, while holding all other assumptions constant, to determine the impact on impairment losses recorded, and whether any additional operating segments would be impacted. We note that this sensitivity identifies the key assets where the increase/decrease in the sales price, in isolation, could cause the carrying value of our operating segments to exceed its recoverable amount for the purposes of the goodwill impairment test or the carrying value of any of our CGUs to exceed its recoverable amount for the purposes of the non-current asset impairment test.



constant, and based on the results of the impairment testing performed in fourth quarter 2015 for Cerro Casale and Pascua-Lama, the fair value of the CGUs would have been reduced from $500 million to $450 million and $810 million to $730 million, respectively. We note that this sensitivity identifies the decrease in the value that, in isolation, would cause the carrying value of the CGU to exceed its recoverable amount. For Cerro Casale and Pascua-Lama, this value decrease is linear to the decrease in value per ounce/pound.

Based on the results of the impairment test performed in fourth quarter 2015, the carrying value of the CGUs that are most sensitive to the change in sales prices used in the annual test are:

As at December 31, 2015 Carrying value

Pueblo Viejo2 $ 3,729 Cortez1,2 3,304 Goldstrike2 2,610 Turquoise Ridge1 1,140 Veladero1 1,084 Pascua-Lama2 742 Cerro Casale 511 Lagunas Norte2 465 Lumwana 351 Buzwagi2 81

1. Carrying value includes goodwill.2. These CGUs have been impaired in 2015 and therefore their fair value

approximates carrying value.

21 Other Assets

As at As at Dec. 31, Dec. 31, 2015 2014

Derivative assets (note 24f) $ 1 $ 2 Goods and services taxes recoverable1 397 565 Notes receivable 105 112 Due from joint venture2 186 164 Restricted cash3 91 59 Prepayments 60 64 Other investments 8 35 Other 175 237

$1,023 $ 1,238

1. Includes VAT and fuel tax receivables of $308 million in Argentina, $52 million in Tanzania and $37 million in Chile (Dec. 31, 2014: $461 million, $62 million and $42 million, respectively). The VAT in Argentina is recoverable once Pascua-Lama enters production.

2. Primarily represents the non-interest bearing shareholder loan due from the Jabal Sayid JV as a result of the divestment of 50 percent interest in Jabal Sayid.

3. Represents cash balance at Pueblo Viejo that is contractually restricted to the disbursements for environmental rehabilitation that are expected to occur near the end of Pueblo Viejo’s mine life.

22 Accounts Payable

As at As at Dec. 31, Dec. 31, 2015 2014

Accounts payable $ 736 $ 974Accruals 422 679

$ 1,158 $ 1,653

23 Other Current Liabilities

As at As at Dec. 31, Dec. 31, 2015 2014

Provision for environmental rehabilitation (note 26b) $ 62 $ 109 Derivative liabilities (note 24f) 160 158 Deposit on gold and silver streaming agreement 36 – Restricted stock units (note 33b) 21 15 Deposit on silver sale agreements 22 40 Other 36 95

$337 $ 417

24 Financial Instruments

Financial instruments include cash; evidence of ownership in an entity; or a contract that imposes an obligation on one party and conveys a right to a second entity to deliver/receive cash or another financial instrument. Information on certain types of financial instruments is included elsewhere in these consolidated financial statements as follows: accounts receivable (note 17); investments (note 15); restricted share units (note 33b).

a) Cash and Equivalents Cash and equivalents include cash, term deposits, treasury bills and money market investments with original maturities of less than 90 days.

As at As at Dec. 31, Dec. 31, 2015 2014

Cash deposits $1,370 $ 967 Term deposits 313 630 Money market investments 772 1,102

$2,455 $ 2,699



of cash and equivalents is held in subsidiaries where we have determined the cash is reinvested for the foreseeable future for the calculation of deferred income tax. This cash can be repatriated; however, there would be a tax cost of doing so, which has not yet been recognized in these financial statements.

Of total cash and cash equivalents as of December 31, 2015, $621 million (2014: $614 million) was held in subsidiaries which have regulatory regulations, contractual restrictions or operate in countries where exchange controls and other legal restrictions apply and are therefore not available for general use by the Company. In addition, $62 million (2014: $242 million)

b) Long-Term Debt1 2015

Amortization At Dec. 31 Proceeds Repayments and other2 At Jan. 1

2.9%/4.4%/5.7% notes3,9 $ 2,182 $ – $ (229) $ 2 $ 2,409 3.85%/5.25% notes 1,077 – (913) 7 1,983 5.80% notes4,9 395 – – – 395 5.75%/6.35% notes5,9 592 – (264) 1 855 Other fixed rate notes6,9 2,451 – (275) 6 2,720 Project financing 646 – (211) 7 850 Capital leases7 153 – (189) (12) 354 Other debt obligations 654 9 (149) – 794 2.5%/4.10%/5.75% notes8,9 1,690 – (898) 9 2,579 Acacia Credit Facility10 128 – (14) – 142

$ 9,968 $ 9 $(3,142) $ 20 $13,081 Less: current portion11 (203) – – – (333)

$ 9,765 $ 9 $(3,142) $ 20 $12,748

2014

Amortization At Dec. 31 Proceeds Repayments and other2 At Jan. 1

2.9%/4.4%/5.7% notes3,9 $ 2,409 $ – $ – $ 3 $ 2,406 3.85%/5.25% notes 1,983 – – – 1,983 5.80% notes4,9 395 – – – 395 5.75%/6.35% notes5,9 855 – – – 855 Other fixed rate notes6,9 2,720 – – 8 2,712 Project financing 850 – (102) 11 941 Capital leases7 354 133 (46) 27 240 Other debt obligations 794 8 (40) (3) 829 2.5%/4.10%/5.75% notes8,9 2,579 – – 2 2,577 Acacia Credit Facility10 142 – – – 142

$ 13,081 $ 141 $ (188) $ 48 $ 13,080 Less: current portion11 (333) – – – (179)

$ 12,748 $ 141 $ (188) $ 48 $ 12,901

1. The agreements that govern our long-term debt each contain various provisions which are not summarized herein. These provisions allow Barrick to, at its option, redeem indebtedness prior to maturity at specified prices and also may permit redemption of debt by Barrick upon the occurrence of certain specified changes in tax legislation.

2. Amortization of debt premium/discount and increases (decreases) in capital leases.3. Consists of $2.2 billion (2014: $2.4 billion) in conjunction with our wholly-owned subsidiary Barrick North America Finance LLC (“BNAF”). This consists of

$1.35 billion of BNAF notes due 2021 and $850 million of BNAF notes due 2041. 4. Consists of $400 million (2014: $400 million) of 5.80% notes which mature in 2034. 5. Consists of $600 million (2014: $864 million) of 6.35% notes which mature in 2036.6. Consists of $2.5 billion (2014: $2.8 billion) in conjunction with our wholly-owned subsidiary Barrick North America Finance LLC (“BNAF”) and our wholly-owned

subsidiary Barrick (PD) Australia Finance Pty Ltd. (“BPDAF”). This consists of $500 million of BNAF notes due 2018, $475 million (2014: $750 million) of BGC notes due 2019, $400 million of BPDAF notes due 2020, $250 million of BNAF notes due 2038 and $850 million of BPDAF notes due 2039.

7. Consists primarily of capital leases at Pascua-Lama, $57 million and Lagunas Norte, $88 million (2014: $199 million and $123 million, respectively).8. Consists of $1.7 billion (2014: $2.6 billion) in conjunction with our wholly-owned subsidiary Barrick North America Finance LLC (“BNAF”). This consists of

$123 million (2014: $252 million) of BGC notes due 2018, $731 million (2014: $1.5 billion) of BGC notes due 2023 and $850 million of BNAF notes due 2043.9. We provide an unconditional and irrevocable guarantee on all Barrick North America Finance LLC (“BNAF”), Barrick (PD) Australia Finance Pty Ltd. (“BPDAF”),

Barrick Gold Finance Company (“BGFC”), and Barrick (HMC) Mining (“BHMC”) notes and generally provide such guarantees on all BNAF, BPDAF, BGFC, and BHMC notes issued, which will rank equally with our other unsecured and unsubordinated obligations.

10. Consists of an export credit backed term loan facility.11. The current portion of long-term debt consists of project financing ($89 million; 2014: $98 million), other debt obligations ($45 million; 2014: $150 million),

capital leases ($41 million; 2014: $71 million) and Acacia credit facility ($28 million; 2014: $14 million).



consisting of $500 million of 5-year notes with a coupon rate of 6.125%, $500 million of 10-year notes with a coupon rate of 6.8%, and $250 million of 30-year notes with a coupon rate of 7.5%. We also provide an unconditional and irrevocable guarantee of these payments, which rank equally with our other unsecured and unsubordinated obligations.

During 2013, the entire balance ($500 million) of the 5-year notes with a coupon rate of 6.125% that was due in September 2013 was repaid.

Pueblo Viejo Project Financing AgreementIn April 2010, Barrick and Goldcorp finalized terms for $1.035 billion (100% basis) in project financing for Pueblo Viejo. The project financing was non-recourse subject to guarantees provided by Barrick and Goldcorp for their proportionate share which will terminate upon Pueblo Viejo meeting certain operating completion tests and are subject to an exclusion for certain political risk events. On February 17, 2015, we received notification that the completion tests have been met, resulting in termination of the guarantees. The lending syndicate is comprised of international financial institutions including export development agencies and commercial banks. The amount was divided into three tranches of $400 million, $375 million and $260 million with tenors of 15, 15 and 12 years, respectively. The $400 million tranche bears a coupon of LIBOR+3.25% pre-completion and scales gradually to LIBOR+5.10% (inclusive of political risk insurance premium) for years 13–15. The $375 million tranche bears a fixed coupon of 3.86% for the entire 15 years. The $260 million tranche bears a coupon of LIBOR+3.25% pre-completion and scales gradually to LIBOR+4.85% (inclusive of political risk insurance premium) for years 11–12.

We have drawn the entire $1.035 billion to date. During the year, $211 million of loans was repaid. The remaining principal balance under the Pueblo Viejo Financing Agreement is $677 million.

Refinancing of the Credit FacilityIn January 2012, we finalized a credit and guarantee agreement (the “Credit Facility”, previously referred to as the ”2012 Credit Facility”) with certain Lenders, which requires such Lenders to make available to us a credit facility of $4.0 billion or the equivalent amount in Canadian dollars. The Credit Facility, which is unsecured, currently has an interest rate of LIBOR plus 2.00% on

1.75%/2.9%/4.4%/5.7% NotesIn June 2011, Barrick, and our wholly-owned subsidiary Barrick North America Finance LLC (”BNAF”), issued an aggregate of $4.0 billion in debt securities comprised of: $700 million of 1.75% notes that had an original maturity date in 2014 and $1.1 billion of 2.90% notes that had an original maturity date in 2016 issued by Barrick (collectively, the “Barrick Notes”) as well as $1.35 billion of 4.40% notes that mature in 2021 and $850 million of 5.70% notes that mature in 2041 issued by BNAF (collectively, the “BNAF Notes”). Barrick provides an unconditional and irrevocable guarantee of the BNAF Notes. The Barrick Notes and the guarantee in respect of the BNAF Notes will rank equally with Barrick’s other unsecured and unsubordinated obligations.

During 2013, the entire balance ($700 million) of the 1.75% notes was repaid along with $871 million of the $1.1 billion of 2.9% notes. During 2015, the remainder ($229 million) of the $1.1 billion of 2.9% notes was repaid.

3.85% and 5.25% NotesOn April 3, 2012, we issued an aggregate of $2 billion in debt securities comprised of $1.25 billion of 3.85% notes that mature in 2022 and $750 million of 5.25% notes that mature in 2042. During 2015, $913 million of the 3.85% notes was repaid.

Other Fixed Rate Notes On October 16, 2009, we issued two tranches of debentures totaling $1.25 billion through our wholly-owned indirect subsidiary Barrick (PD) Australia Finance Pty Ltd. (“BPDAF”) consisting of $850 million of 30-year notes with a coupon rate of 5.95%, and $400 million of 10-year notes with a coupon rate of 4.95%. We also provide an unconditional and irrevocable guarantee of these payments, which rank equally with our other unsecured and unsubordinated obligations.

On March 19, 2009, we issued an aggregate of $750 million of 10-year notes with a coupon rate of 6.95% for general corporate purposes. The notes are unsecured, unsubordinated obligations and rank equally with our other unsecured, unsubordinated obligations. During 2015, $275 million was repaid.

In September 2008, we issued an aggregate of $1.25 billion of notes through our wholly-owned indirect subsidiaries Barrick North America Finance LLC and Barrick Gold Financeco LLC (collectively, the “LLCs”)



During 2013, $398 million of the $650 million 2.50% notes were repaid. During 2015, $769 million of 4.1% notes and $129 million of 2.5% notes were repaid.

Acacia Credit FacilityIn January 2013, Acacia concluded negotiations with a group of commercial banks for the provision of an export credit backed term loan facility (the “Facility”) for the amount of US$142 million. The Facility was put in place to fund a substantial portion of the construction costs of the new CIL circuit at the process plant at the Bulyanhulu Project (the “Project”). The Facility is collateralized by the Project, has a term of seven years and, when drawn, the spread over LIBOR will be 250 basis points. The Facility is repayable in equal installments over the term of the Facility, after a two-year repayment holiday period. The interest rate has been fixed at an effective rate of 3.6% through the use of an interest rate swap. At December 31, 2014, the full value of the Facility was drawn and in 2015, $14 million was repaid.

drawn amounts, and a commitment rate of 0.35% on undrawn amounts. In December 2015, $3.61 billion of the $4 billion credit facility was extended from January 2020 to January 2021. The remaining $390 million currently terminates in January 2020. The 2012 Credit Facility is undrawn as at December 31, 2015.

2.50%/4.10%/5.75% NotesOn May 2, 2013, we issued an aggregate of $3 billion in notes through Barrick and our wholly-owned indirect subsidiary Barrick North America Finance LLC consisting of $650 million of 2.50% notes that mature in 2018, $1.5 billion of 4.10% notes that mature in 2023 and $850 million of 5.75% notes issued by BNAF that mature in 2043. $2.0 billion of the net proceeds from this offering were used to repay existing indebtedness under our $4 billion revolving credit facility. We provided an unconditional and irrevocable guarantee on the $850 million of 5.75% notes issued by BNAF, which will rank equally with our other unsecured and unsubordinated obligations.

Interest 2015 2014

Interest Effective Interest Effective For the years ended December 31 cost rate1 cost rate1

2.9%/4.4%/5.7% notes $ 120 5.12% $ 118 4.84% 3.85%/5.25% notes 86 4.65% 89 4.44% 5.80% notes 23 5.87% 23 5.87% 5.75%/6.35% notes 66 8.73% 54 6.25% Other fixed rate notes 177 6.59% 179 6.50% Project financing 41 5.46% 47 5.09% Capital leases 11 4.45% 13 3.51% Other debt obligations 41 6.08% 46 5.97% 2.5%/4.10%/5.75% notes 118 4.73% 120 4.59% Acacia credit facility 5 3.59% 4 2.80% Deposits on silver contracts (note 28) 61 8.40% 57 8.32% Deposits on gold and silver streaming (note 28) 9 6.15% – n/a Accretion 63 75 Other interest 3 1 Gain on debt extinguishment (68) –

$ 756 $ 826 Less: interest capitalized (17) (30)

$ 739 $ 796

1. The effective rate includes the stated interest rate under the debt agreement, amortization of debt issue costs and debt discount/premium and the impact of interest rate contracts designated in a hedging relationship with debt.



Scheduled Debt Repayments1 Maturity 2021 and Issuer Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 thereafter Total

2.50% notes BGC 2018 $ – $ – $ 123 $ – $ – $ – $ 123 6.80% notes3 BNAF 2018 – – 500 – – – 500 6.95% notes3 BGC 2019 – – – 475 – – 475 4.95% notes3 BPDAF 2020 – – – – 400 – 400 7.31% notes2 BGC 2021 – – – – – 7 7 4.40% notes BNAF 2021 – – – – – 1,350 1,350 3.85% notes BGC 2022 – – – – – 337 337 4.10% notes BGC 2023 – – – – – 731 731 7.73% notes2 BGC 2025 – – – – – 7 7 7.70% notes2 BGC 2025 – – – – – 5 5 7.37% notes2 BGC 2026 – – – – – 32 32 8.05% notes2 BGC 2026 – – – – – 15 15 6.38% notes2 BGC 2033 – – – – – 200 200 5.80% notes BGC 2034 – – – – – 200 200 5.80% notes BGFC 2034 – – – – – 200 200 6.45% notes2 BGC 2035 – – – – – 300 300 6.35% notes BHMC 2036 – – – – – 600 600 7.50% notes3 BNAF 2038 – – – – – 250 250 5.95% notes3 BPDAF 2039 – – – – – 850 850 5.70% notes BNAF 2041 – – – – – 850 850 5.25% notes BGC 2042 – – – – – 750 750 5.75% notes BNAF 2043 – – – – – 850 850 Other debt obligations2 45 5 4 1 – – 55 Project financing 89 89 89 89 89 232 677 Acacia credit facility 28 29 28 29 14 – 128

$ 162 $ 123 $ 744 $ 594 $ 503 $ 7,766 $ 9,892

Minimum annual payments under capital leases $ 41 $ 37 $ 30 $ 16 $ 9 $ 20 $ 153

1. This table illustrates the contractual undiscounted cash flows, and may not agree with the amounts disclosed in the consolidated balance sheet.2. Included in Other debt obligations in the Long-Term Debt table.3. Included in Other fixed rate notes in the Long-Term Debt table.



c) Derivative Instruments (“Derivatives”) In the normal course of business, our assets, liabilities and forecasted transactions, as reported in US dollars, are impacted by various market risks including, but not limited to:

Item Impacted by

Sales Prices of gold, silver and copper

By-product credits Prices of silver, copper and gold

Cost of sales

Consumption of diesel fuel, propane, natural gas, and electricity

Prices of diesel fuel, propane, natural gas, and electricity

Non-US dollar expenditures Currency exchange rates – US dollar versus A$, ARS, C$, CLP, EUR, PGK, TZS, ZAR, and ZMW

General and administration, exploration and evaluation costs

Currency exchange rates – US dollar versus A$, ARS, C$, CLP, GBP, PGK, TZS, ZAR, and ZMW

Capital expenditures

Non-US dollar capital expenditures

Currency exchange rates – US dollar versus A$, ARS, C$, CLP, EUR, GBP, PGK, and ZAR

Consumption of steel Price of steel

Interest earned on cash and equivalents

US dollar interest rates

Interest paid on fixed-rate borrowings

US dollar interest rates

The time frame and manner in which we manage those risks varies for each item based upon our assessment of the risk and available alternatives for mitigating risk. For these particular risks, we believe that derivatives are an appropriate way of managing the risk.

We use derivatives as part of our risk management program to mitigate variability associated with changing market values related to the hedged item. Many of the derivatives we use meet the hedge effectiveness criteria and are designated in a hedge accounting relationship.

Certain derivatives are designated as either hedges of the fair value of recognized assets or liabilities or of firm commitments (“fair value hedges”) or hedges of highly probable forecasted transactions (“cash flow hedges”), collectively known as “accounting hedges”. Hedges that are expected to be highly effective in achieving offsetting changes in fair value or cash flows are assessed on an ongoing basis to determine that they actually have been highly effective throughout the financial reporting periods for which they were designated. Some of the derivative instruments we use are effective in achieving our risk management objectives, but they do not meet the strict hedge accounting criteria. These derivatives are considered to be “non-hedge derivatives”.



d) Summary of Derivatives at December 31, 2015 Accounting classification by Notional amount by term to maturity notional amount

Within 2 to 3 4 to 5 Cash flow Non- Fair value 1 year years years Total hedge hedge (USD)

US dollar interest rate contracts (US$ millions) Total receive-float swap positions $ 28 $ 57 $ 43 $ 128 $ 128 $ – $ 1 Currency contracts A$:US$ contracts (A$ millions) 87 – – 87 85 2 (36) Commodity contracts Fuel contracts (thousands of barrels)1 2,933 3,173 – 6,106 4,988 1,118 (228)

1. Fuel contracts represent a combination of WTI swaps and BRENT options. These derivatives hedge physical supply contracts based on the price of fuel across our operating mine sites plus a spread. WTI represents West Texas Intermediate and BRENT represents Brent Crude Oil.

Fair Values of Derivative Instruments Asset derivatives Liability derivatives

Fair value Fair value Fair value Fair value Balance as at as at Balance as at as at sheet Dec. 31, Dec. 31, sheet Dec. 31, Dec. 31, classification 2015 2014 classification 2015 2014

Derivatives designated as hedging instruments US dollar interest rate contracts Other assets $ 1 $ 2 Other liabilities $ – $ 1 Currency contracts Other assets – – Other liabilities 16 71 Commodity contracts1 Other assets – – Other liabilities 190 –

Total derivatives classified as hedging instruments $ 1 $ 2 $206 $ 72

Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments US dollar interest rate contracts Other assets $ – $ – Otherliabilities $ – $ – Currency contracts Otherassets – 4 Other liabilities 20 30 Commodity contracts Other assets – 3 Other liabilities 38 185

Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments $ – $ 7 $ 58 $ 215

Total derivatives $ 1 $ 9 $264 $ 287

1. The majority of our fuel contracts are now being designated as hedging instruments as a result of adoption of IFRS 9. These contracts did not qualify for hedge accounting prior to January 1, 2015.

As of December 31, 2015, we had 19 counterparties to our derivative positions. We proactively manage our exposure to individual counterparties in order to mitigate both credit and liquidity risks. We have one counterparty with which we hold a net asset position of $0.2 million, and 18 counterparties with which we are in a net liability position, for a total net liability of $263 million. On an ongoing basis, we monitor our exposures and ensure that none of the counterparties with which we hold outstanding contracts has declared insolvency.

US Dollar Interest Rate ContractsFair Value HedgesDuring 2014, we closed out $400 million of pay-variable receive-fixed swap positions which were used to hedge the fair value of a portion of our long-term fixed-rate debt.

Cash Flow HedgesAt December 31, 2015, Acacia has $128 million of pay-fixed receive-float interest rate swaps to hedge the floating rate debt associated with the Bulyanhulu plant



expansion. These contracts, designated as cash flow hedges, convert the floating rate debt as it is drawn against the Financing agreement.

Currency ContractsCash Flow HedgesDuring the year, no currency contracts have been designated against forecasted non-US dollar denominated expenditures. In total, we have A$85 million designated as cash flow hedges of our anticipated operating, administrative and sustaining capital spend. The outstanding contracts hedge the variability of the US dollar amount of those expenditures caused by changes in currency exchange rates over the next year. The effective portion of changes in fair value of the currency contracts is recorded in OCI until the forecasted expenditure impacts earnings. Gains and losses from hedge ineffectiveness are recognized in current earnings classified in the consolidated statement of income as gains (losses) on non-hedge derivatives.

During 2014, we sold back and effectively closed out approximately C$149 million of our Canadian dollar option contracts as a loss mitigation strategy. We crystallized losses of approximately $1 million, which were recognized in the consolidated statement of income based on the original hedge contract maturity dates. At December 31, 2015, none of these losses remain crystallized in OCI.

During 2013, we sold back and effectively closed out approximately A$990 million of our Australian dollar forward contracts as a loss mitigation strategy. No cash settlement occurred and payments will net at maturity (2014–2016). Including Australian dollar contracts closed out in 2012, $14 million of losses remain crystallized in OCI at December 31, 2015.

Non-Hedge DerivativesThe non-hedge currency contracts are used to mitigate the variability of the US dollar amount of non-US dollar denominated exposures that do not meet the strict hedge effectiveness criteria. Changes in the fair value of the non-hedge currency contracts are recorded in the consolidated statement of income as gains (losses) on non-hedge derivatives.

During the year, we did not write any currency options. As a result, there are no outstanding notional amounts to report at December 31, 2015.

Commodity ContractsDiesel/Propane/Electricity/Natural GasCash Flow HedgesDuring the year, 8,040 thousand barrels of WTI were designated against forecasted fuel consumption at our mines, some of which are hedges which matured within the year. These contracts are now being designated as hedging instruments as a result of adopting IFRS 9 and did not qualify for hedge accounting prior to January 1, 2015. In total, we have 4,988 thousand barrels of WTI designated as cash flow hedges of our exposure to forecasted fuel purchases at our mines.

Non-Hedge DerivativesDuring the year, we entered into a contract to purchase 294 thousand barrels of Brent to economically hedge our exposure to forecasted fuel purchases for expected consumption at our mines. In total, on a combined basis we have 466 thousand barrels of Brent swaps outstanding that economically hedge our exposure to forecasted fuel purchases at our mines.

During the year, we did not write any fuel options. As a result, there are no outstanding notional amounts to report at December 31, 2015.

Metals ContractsCash Flow Hedges During 2013, we purchased 251 million pounds of copper collars for 2014 which matured evenly throughout 2014. These contracts contained purchased put and sold call options with weighted average strike prices of $3.00/lb and $3.75/lb, respectively. At December 31, 2014, there are no remaining positions classified as cash flow hedges or economic hedges of our Zaldívar mine. Previously, these contracts were designated as cash flow hedges, with the effective portion of the hedge recognized in OCI and the ineffective portion, together with the changes in time value, recognized in non-hedge derivative gains (losses). Provided that the spot copper price remained within the collar band, any unrealized gain (loss) on the collar was attributable to time value.

During 2014, we recorded unrealized losses on our copper collars of $6 million to changes in time value. This was included in current period earnings as losses on non-hedge derivative activities. Gains and losses from hedge ineffectiveness and time value of options, which



are generally excluded, are recognized in the consolidated statement of income as gains on non-hedge derivatives.

During 2013, we early terminated 65 million ounces of silver hedges. We realized net cash proceeds of approximately $190 million with $16 million remaining crystallized in OCI at December 31, 2015, to be recognized in revenue as the exposure occurs. Any unrealized changes and realized gains/losses on

ineffective amounts or time value have been recognized in the consolidated statements of income as gains on non-hedge derivatives.

Non-Hedge DerivativesWe enter into purchased and written contracts with the primary objective of increasing the realized price on some of our gold sales. During the year, we did not write any metal options. As a result, there are no outstanding notional amounts to report at December 31, 2015.

Cash Flow Hedge Gains (Losses) in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (“AOCI”)

Commodity Interest rate price hedges Currency hedges hedges

General and Operating administrative Capital Long-term Gold/Silver1 Copper Fuel costs costs expenditures debt Total

At January 1, 2014 $ 18 $ – $ (4) $ 53 $ (2) $ – $ (26) $ 39 Effective portion of change in value of hedging instruments – 2 – (44) 3 – (2) (41) Transfers to earnings: On recording hedged items in earnings/PP&E1 – (2) 4 (93) (4) – 3 (92) Hedge ineffectiveness due to changes in original forecasted transaction – – – 5 – – – 5

At December 31, 2014 $ 18 $ – $ – $ (79) $ (3) $ – $ (25) $ (89) Impact of adopting IFRS 9 on January 1, 2015 – – – (5) – – – (5) Effective portion of change in fair value of hedging instruments – – (135) (27) (14) (2) 1 (177) Transfers to earnings: On recording hedged items in earnings/PP&E1 (4) – 19 70 17 2 2 106 Hedge ineffectiveness due to changes in original forecasted transaction – – 14 11 – – – 25

At December 31, 2015 $ 14 $ – $ (102) $ (30) $ – $ – $ (22) $ (140)

General and Property, Gold/Silver Copper Cost of Cost of administrative plant and Interest Hedge gains/losses classified within sales sales sales sales costs equipment expense Total

Portion of hedge gain (loss) expected to affect 2016 earnings2 $ 4 $ – $ (43) $ (30) $ – $ – $ (3) $ (72)

1. Realized gains (losses) on qualifying currency hedges of capital expenditures are transferred from OCI to PP&E on settlement.2. Based on the fair value of hedge contracts at December 31, 2015.



Cash Flow Hedge Gains (Losses) at December 31 Location of gain (loss) Amount of gain (loss)

Location of gain (loss) Amount of gain recognized in income recognized in income

Amount of gain transferred from OCI (loss) transferred (ineffective portion and (ineffective portion and

Derivatives in cash flow (loss) recognized into income/PP&E from OCI into income amount excluded from amount excluded from

hedging relationships in OCI (effective portion) (effective portion) effectiveness testing) effectiveness testing)

2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014

Gain (loss) on non- Interest rate contracts $ 1 $ (2) Finance income/finance costs $ (2) $ (3) hedge derivatives $ – $ –

Foreign exchange Cost of sales/general and Gain (loss) on non- contracts (43) (41) administrative costs/PP&E (89) 97 hedge derivatives (11) (4)

Gain (loss) on non- Commodity contracts (135) 2 Revenue/cost of sales (15) (2) hedge derivatives (14) (6)

Total $(177) $ (41) $ (106) $ 92 $ (25) $ (10)

e) Gains (Losses) on Non-hedge DerivativesFor the years ended December 31 2015 2014

Commodity contracts Gold $ – $ 1 Silver 5 – Copper – 3 Fuel (10) (181) Currency contracts (8) (8) Interest rate contracts – 2

$ (13) $ (183)

Gains (losses) attributable to copper option collar hedges1 $ – $ (6) Gains (losses) attributable to currency option collar hedges1 – 1 Hedge ineffectiveness (25) (5)

$ (25) $ (10)

$ (38) $ (193)

1. Represents unrealized gains (losses) attributable to changes in time value of the collars, which were excluded from the hedge effectiveness assessment in 2014.

f) Derivative Assets and Liabilities 2015 2014

At January 1 $(278) $ (59) Derivatives cash (inflow) outflow Operating activities 211 14 Financing activities – (9) Change in fair value of: Non-hedge derivatives (13) (183) Cash flow hedges: Effective portion (177) (41) Ineffective portion 25 5 Excluded from effectiveness changes (31) (5)

At December 31 $(263) $ (278)

Classification: Other current assets $ – $ 7 Other long-term assets 1 2 Other current liabilities (160) (158) Other long-term obligations (104) (129)

$(263) $ (278)

observable for the asset or liability (for example, interest rate and yield curves observable at commonly quoted intervals, forward pricing curves used to value currency and commodity contracts and volatility measurements used to value option contracts), or inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data or other means. Level 3 inputs are unobservable (supported by little or no market activity). The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to Level 1 inputs and the lowest priority to Level 3 inputs.

Fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The fair value hierarchy establishes three levels to classify the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value. Level 1 inputs are quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. Level 2 inputs are quoted prices in markets that are not active, quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets, inputs other than quoted prices that are

25 Fair Value Measurements



a) Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring BasisFair Value Measurements

Quoted prices Significant in active other Significant markets for observable unobservable identical assets inputs inputs Aggregate At December 31, 2015 (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) fair value

Cash and equivalents $ 2,455 $ – $ – $ 2,455 Other investments 8 – – 8 Derivatives – (263) – (263) Receivables from provisional copper and gold sales – 76 – 76

$ 2,463 $ (187) $ – $ 2,276

Fair Value Measurements

Quoted prices Significant in active other Significant markets for observable unobservable identical assets inputs inputs Aggregate At December 31, 2014 (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) fair value

Cash and equivalents $ 2,699 $ – $ – $ 2,699 Other investments 35 – – 35 Derivatives – (278) – (278) Receivables from provisional copper and gold sales – 184 – 184

$ 2,734 $ (94) $ – $ 2,640

b) Fair Values of Financial Assets and Liabilities

At Dec. 31, 2015 At Dec. 31, 2014 Carrying Estimated Carrying Estimated amount fair value amount fair value

Financial assets Other receivables $ 365 $ 365 $ 385 $ 385 Other investments1 8 8 35 35 Derivative assets 1 1 9 9

$ 374 $ 374 $ 429 $ 429

Financial liabilities Debt2 $ 9,968 $ 8,516 $ 13,081 $ 13,356 Derivative liabilities 264 264 287 287 Other liabilities 223 223 360 360

$ 10,455 $ 9,003 $ 13,728 $ 14,003

1. Recorded at fair value. Quoted market prices are used to determine fair value.2. Debt is generally recorded at amortized cost except for obligations that are designated in a fair-value hedge relationship, in which case the carrying amount is

adjusted for changes in fair value of the hedging instrument in periods when a hedge relationship exists. The fair value of debt is primarily determined using quoted market prices. Balance includes both current and long-term portions of debt.

We do not offset financial assets with financial liabilities.



c) Assets Measured at Fair Value on a Non-Recurring Basis Quoted prices Significant in active other Significant markets for observable unobservable identical assets inputs inputs Aggregate (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) fair value

Other assets1 $ – $ – $ – $ – Property, plant and equipment2 – – 5,450 5,450 Goodwill3 – – 1,214 1,214

1. Other assets were written down by $49 million which was included in earnings in this period, to their fair value of $nil. 2. Property, plant and equipment were written down by $1,747 million which was included in earnings in this period, to their fair value less costs of disposal

of $5,450 million.3. Goodwill was written down as a result of impairment of CGUs by $2,171 million which was included in earnings in this period.

Valuation TechniquesCash EquivalentsThe fair value of our cash equivalents is classified within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy because they are valued using quoted market prices in active markets. Our cash equivalents are comprised of U.S. Treasury bills and money market securities that are invested primarily in U.S. Treasury bills.

Other InvestmentsThe fair value of other investments is determined based on the closing price of each security at the balance sheet date. The closing price is a quoted market price obtained from the exchange that is the principal active market for the particular security, and therefore other investments are classified within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy.

Derivative InstrumentsThe fair value of derivative instruments is determined using either present value techniques or option pricing models that utilize a variety of inputs that are a combination of quoted prices and market-corroborated inputs. The fair value of all our derivative contracts includes an adjustment for credit risk. For counterparties in a net asset position, credit risk is based upon the observed credit default swap spread for each particular counterparty, as appropriate. For counterparties in a net liability position, credit risk is based upon Barrick’s observed credit default swap spread. The fair value of US dollar interest rate and currency swap contracts is determined by discounting contracted cash flows using

a discount rate derived from observed LIBOR and swap rate curves and CDS rates. In the case of currency contracts, we convert non-US dollar cash flows into US dollars using an exchange rate derived from currency swap curves and CDS rates. The fair value of commodity forward contracts is determined by discounting contractual cash flows using a discount rate derived from observed LIBOR and swap rate curves and CDS rates. Contractual cash flows are calculated using a forward pricing curve derived from observed forward prices for each commodity. Derivative instruments are classified within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

Receivables from Provisional Copper and Gold SalesThe fair value of receivables arising from copper and gold sales contracts that contain provisional pricing mechanisms is determined using the appropriate quoted forward price from the exchange that is the principal active market for the particular metal. As such, these receivables, which meet the definition of an embedded derivative, are classified within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

Other Long-Term AssetsThe fair value of property, plant and equipment, goodwill, intangibles and other assets is determined primarily using an income approach based on unobservable cash flows and a market multiples approach where applicable, and as a result is classified within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. Refer to note 20 for disclosure of inputs used to develop these measures.



26 Provisions

a) Provisions As at As at Dec. 31, Dec. 31, 2015 2014

Environmental rehabilitation (“PER”) $1,920 $ 2,375Post-retirement benefits 86 103Share-based payments 24 21 Other employee benefits 46 33 Other 26 29

$2,102 $ 2,561

b) Environmental Rehabilitation 2015 2014

At January 1 $2,484 $ 2,359 PERs divested during the year (170) (17) PERs arising (decreasing) in the year (229) 125 Impact of revisions to expected cash flows recorded in earnings 38 58 Settlements Cash payments (89) (108) Settlement gains (6) (8) Accretion 63 75 Assets held-for-sale (109) –

At December 31 $1,982 $ 2,484

Current portion (note 23) (62) (109)

$1,920 $ 2,375

The eventual settlement of all PERs is expected to take place between 2015 and 2054.

The PER has decreased in fourth quarter 2015 by $162 million primarily due to changes in cost estimates, partially offset by changes in discount rates. For the year ended December 31, 2015, our PER balance decreased by $502 million as a result of divestments as well as various impacts at our mine sites including new requirements related to water treatment, expanded footprints of our operations and updated estimates for reclamation activities. A 1% increase in the discount rate would result in a decrease in PER by $286 million and a 1% decrease in the discount rate would result in an increase in PER by $374 million, while holding the other assumptions constant.

27 Financial Risk Management

Our financial instruments are comprised of financial liabilities and financial assets. Our principal financial liabilities, other than derivatives, comprise accounts payable and debt. The main purpose of these financial instruments is to manage short-term cash flow and raise funds for our capital expenditure program. Our principal financial assets, other than derivative instruments, are cash and equivalents and accounts receivable, which arise directly from our operations. In the normal course of business, we use derivative instruments to mitigate exposure to various financial risks.

We manage our exposure to key financial risks in accordance with our financial risk management policy. The objective of the policy is to support the delivery of our financial targets while protecting future financial security. The main risks that could adversely affect our financial assets, liabilities or future cash flows are as follows:a) Market risk, including commodity price risk, foreign

currency and interest rate risk;b) Credit risk; c) Liquidity risk; andd) Capital risk management.

Management designs strategies for managing each of these risks, which are summarized below. Our senior management oversees the management of financial risks. Our senior management ensures that our financial risk-taking activities are governed by policies and procedures and that financial risks are identified, measured and managed in accordance with our policies and our risk appetite. All derivative activities for risk management purposes are carried out by the appropriate functions.

a) Market RiskMarket risk is the risk that changes in market factors, such as commodity prices, foreign exchange rates or interest rates, will affect the value of our financial instruments. We manage market risk by either accepting it or mitigating it through the use of derivatives and other economic hedging strategies.



Commodity Price RiskGold and CopperWe sell our gold and copper production in the world market. The market prices of gold and copper are the primary drivers of our profitability and ability to generate both operating and free cash flow. All of our future gold and copper production is unhedged in order to provide our shareholders with full exposure to changes in the market gold and copper prices.

FuelOn average we consume approximately 4 million barrels of diesel fuel annually across all our mines. Diesel fuel is refined from crude oil and is therefore subject to the same price volatility affecting crude oil prices. Therefore, volatility in crude oil prices has a significant direct and indirect impact on our production costs. To mitigate this volatility, we employ a strategy of using financial contracts to hedge our exposure to oil prices.

Foreign Currency RiskThe functional and reporting currency for all of our operating segments is the US dollar and we report our results using the US dollar. The majority of our operating and capital expenditures are denominated and settled in US dollars. We have exposure to the Australian dollar and Canadian dollar through a combination of mine operating costs and general and administrative costs; and to the Papua New Guinea kina, Peruvian sol, Chilean peso, Argentinean peso, Dominican Republic peso and Zambian kwacha through mine operating costs. Consequently, fluctuations in the US dollar exchange rate against these currencies increase the volatility of cost of sales, general and administrative costs and overall net earnings, when translated into US dollars. To mitigate these inherent risks and provide greater certainty over certain costs, we had foreign currency hedges in place for some of our Australian dollar, Canadian dollar and Chilean peso exposures. We have had a significant decrease in our hedging program over the last few years and as a result, we now have greater exposure to fluctuations in the value of the Chilean peso and Australian and Canadian dollars compared to the US dollar.

The following table shows gains (losses) associated with a 10% change in exchange rate of the Australian dollar:

Impact of a 10% change in exchange rate of Australian dollar

Average Effect on Effect on exchange rate net earnings equity

2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014

10% strengthening $0.75 $ 0.90 $(11) $ (33) $(11) $ (33) 10% weakening 0.75 0.90 11 33 11 33

Interest Rate Risk Interest rate risk refers to the risk that the value of a financial instrument or cash flows associated with the instruments will fluctuate due to changes in market interest rates. Currently, our interest rate exposure mainly relates to interest receipts on our cash balances ($2.5 billion at the end of the year); the mark-to-market value of derivative instruments; the fair value and ongoing payments under US dollar interest-rate swaps; and to the interest payments on our variable-rate debt ($0.6 billion at December 31, 2015).

The following table shows the approximate interest rate sensitivities of our financial assets and liabilities as at December 31:

Impact of a 1% change in interest rate

Effect on Effect on net earnings equity

2015 2014 2015 2014

1% increase $ 13 $ 12 $ 13 $ 12 1% decrease (13) (12) (13) (12)

b) Credit Risk Credit risk is the risk that a third party might fail to fulfill its performance obligations under the terms of a financial instrument. Credit risk arises from cash and equivalents, trade and other receivables as well as derivative assets. For cash and equivalents and trade and other receivables, credit risk exposure equals the carrying amount on the balance sheet, net of any overdraft positions. To mitigate our inherent exposure to credit risk we maintain policies to limit the concentration of credit risk, review counterparty creditworthiness on a monthly basis, and



ensure liquidity of available funds. We also invest our cash and equivalents in highly rated financial institutions, primarily within the United States and other investment grade countries1. Furthermore, we sell our gold and copper production into the world market and to private customers with strong credit ratings. Historically customer defaults have not had a significant impact on our operating results or financial position.

For derivatives with a positive fair value, we are exposed to credit risk equal to the carrying value. When the fair value of a derivative is negative, we assume no credit risk. We mitigate credit risk on derivatives by: Entering into derivatives with high credit-quality

counterparties; Limiting the amount of net exposure with each

counterparty; and Monitoring the financial condition of counterparties

on a regular basis.

The Company’s maximum exposure to credit risk at the reporting date is the carrying value of each of the financial assets disclosed as follows:

As at As at Dec. 31, Dec. 31, 2015 2014

Cash and equivalents $2,455 $ 2,699 Accounts receivable 275 418 Net derivative assets by counterparty – 1

$2,730 $ 3,118

1. Investment grade countries include Canada, Chile, Australia, and Peru. Investment grade countries are defined as being rated BBB- or higher by S&P.

c) Liquidity RiskLiquidity risk is the risk of loss from not having access to sufficient funds to meet both expected and unexpected cash demands. We manage our exposure to liquidity risk by maintaining cash reserves, access to undrawn credit facilities and access to public debt markets, by staggering the maturities of outstanding debt instruments to mitigate refinancing risk and by monitoring of forecasted and actual cash flows. Details of the undrawn credit facility are included in note 24.

Our capital structure comprises a mix of debt and shareholders’ equity. As at December 31, 2015, our total debt was $10.0 billion (debt net of cash and equivalents was $7.5 billion) compared to total debt as at December 31, 2014 of $13.1 billion (debt net of cash and equivalents was $10.4 billion).

As part of our capital allocation strategy, we are constantly evaluating our capital expenditures and making reductions where the risk-adjusted returns do not justify the investment. Our primary source of liquidity is our operating cash flow. Other options to enhance liquidity include drawing the $4.0 billion available under our Credit Facility (subject to compliance with covenants and the making of certain representations and warranties, this facility is available for drawdown as a source of financing), further asset sales and issuances of debt or equity securities in the public markets or to private investors, which could be undertaken for liquidity enhancement and/or in connection with establishing a strategic partnership. Many factors, including, but not limited to, general market conditions and then prevailing metals prices could impact our ability to issue securities on acceptable terms, as could our credit ratings. Moody’s and S&P rate our long-term debt Baa3 and BBB-, respectively. Changes in our ratings could affect the trading prices of our securities and our cost of capital. If we were to borrow under our Credit Facility, the applicable interest rate on the amounts borrowed would be based, in part, on our credit ratings at the time. The key financial covenant, which was amended in fourth quarter 2015, in the Credit Facility (undrawn as at December 31, 2015) requires Barrick to maintain a net debt to total capitalization ratio, as defined in the agreement, of 0.60:1 or lower (Barrick’s net debt to total capitalization ratio was 0.44:1 as at December 31, 2015).

The following table outlines the expected maturity of our significant financial assets and liabilities into relevant maturity groupings based on the remaining period from the balance sheet date to the contractual maturity date. As the amounts disclosed in the table are the contractual undiscounted cash flows, these balances may not agree with the amounts disclosed in the balance sheet.



As at December 31, 2015

(in $ millions) Less than 1 year 1 to 3 years 3 to 5 years Over 5 years Total

Cash and equivalents $2,455 $ – $ – $ – $2,455 Accounts receivable 275 – – – 275 Derivative assets – 1 – – 1 Trade and other payables 1,158 – – – 1,158 Debt 203 934 1,122 7,786 10,045 Derivative liabilities 160 102 2 – 264 Other liabilities 40 44 17 122 223

As at December 31, 2014

(in $ millions) Less than 1 year 1 to 3 years 3 to 5 years Over 5 years Total

Cash and equivalents $ 2,699 $ – $ – $ – $ 2,699 Accounts receivable 418 – – – 418 Derivative assets 7 1 1 – 9 Trade and other payables 1,653 – – – 1,653 Debt 333 919 1,853 10,082 13,187 Derivative liabilities 157 117 13 – 287 Other liabilities 67 112 46 135 360

objectives are also to ensure that we maintain a strong balance sheet and optimize the use of debt and equity to support our business and provide financial flexibility in order to maximize shareholder value. We define capital as total debt less cash and equivalents and it is managed by management subject to approved policies and limits by the Board of Directors. We have no significant financial covenants or capital requirements with our lenders or other parties other than what is discussed under liquidity risk in note 27.

were entitled to an upfront cash payment of $625 million payable over three years from the date of the agreement, as well as ongoing payments in cash of the lesser of $3.90 (subject to an annual inflation adjustment of 1 percent starting three years after project completion at Pascua-Lama) and the prevailing market price for each ounce of silver delivered under the agreement.

An imputed interest expense is being recorded on the liability at the rate implicit in the agreement. The liability plus imputed interest will be amortized based on the difference between the effective contract price for silver and the amount of the ongoing cash payment per ounce of silver delivered under the agreement.

Gold and Silver Streaming AgreementOn September 29, 2015, we closed a gold and silver streaming transaction with Royal Gold, Inc. (“Royal Gold”) for production linked to Barrick’s 60 percent interest in the Pueblo Viejo mine. Royal Gold made an

d) Capital Risk ManagementOur objective when managing capital is to provide value for shareholders by maintaining an optimal short-term and long-term capital structure in order to reduce the overall cost of capital while preserving our ability to continue as a going concern. Our capital management objectives are to safeguard our ability to support our operating requirements on an ongoing basis, continue the development and exploration of our mineral properties and support any expansion plans. Our

As at As at Dec. 31, Dec. 31, 2015 2014

Deposit on silver sale agreement $ 716 $ 668 Deposit on gold and silver streaming agreement 565 – Derivative liabilities (note 24f) 104 129 Deferred revenue 2 85 Provision for supply contract restructuring costs – 8 Provision for offsite remediation 55 56 Other 144 239

$1,586 $ 1,185

Silver Sale AgreementOur silver sale agreement with Silver Wheaton Corp. (“Silver Wheaton”) requires us to deliver 25 percent of the life of mine silver production from the Pascua-Lama project and 100 percent of silver production from the Lagunas Norte, Pierina and Veladero mines (“South American mines”) until the end of 2018. In return, we

28 Other Non-Current Liabilities



upfront cash payment of $610 million and will continue to make cash payments for gold and silver delivered under the agreement. The $610 million upfront payment is not repayable and Barrick is obligated to deliver gold and silver based on Pueblo Viejo’s production. We have accounted for the upfront payment as deferred revenue and will recognize it in earnings, along with the ongoing cash payments, as the gold and silver is delivered to Royal Gold. We will also be recording accretion expense on the deferred revenue balance as the time value of the upfront deposit represents a significant component of the transaction.

Under the terms of the agreement, Barrick will sell gold and silver to Royal Gold equivalent to: 7.5 percent of Barrick’s interest in the gold produced

at Pueblo Viejo until 990,000 ounces of gold have been delivered, and 3.75 percent thereafter.

75 percent of Barrick’s interest in the silver produced at Pueblo Viejo until 50 million ounces have been delivered, and 37.5 percent thereafter. Silver will be delivered based on a fixed recovery rate of 70 percent. Silver above this recovery rate is not subject to the stream.

Barrick will receive ongoing cash payments from Royal Gold equivalent to 30 percent of the prevailing spot prices for the first 550,000 ounces of gold and 23.1 million ounces of silver delivered. Thereafter payments will double to 60 percent of prevailing spot prices for each subsequent ounce of gold and silver delivered. Ongoing cash payments to Barrick are tied to prevailing spot prices rather than fixed in advance, maintaining exposure to higher gold and silver prices in the future.

29 Deferred Income Taxes

Recognition and MeasurementWe record deferred income tax assets and liabilities where temporary differences exist between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities in our balance sheet and their tax bases. The measurement and recognition of deferred income tax assets and liabilities takes into account: substantively enacted rates that will apply when temporary differences reverse; interpretations of relevant tax legislation; estimates of the tax bases of assets and liabilities; and the deductibility of expenditures for

income tax purposes. In addition, the measurement and recognition of deferred tax assets takes into account tax planning strategies. We recognize the effect of changes in our assessment of these estimates and factors when they occur. Changes in deferred income tax assets and liabilities are allocated between net income, other comprehensive income, and goodwill based on the source of the change.

Current income taxes of $89 million have been provided on the undistributed earnings of certain foreign subsidiaries. Deferred income taxes have not been provided on the undistributed earnings of all other foreign subsidiaries for which we are able to control the timing of the remittance, and it is probable that there will be no remittance in the foreseeable future. These undistributed earnings amounted to $2,500 million as at December 31, 2015.

Sources of Deferred Income Tax Assets and Liabilities

As at As at Dec. 31, Dec. 31, 2015 2014

Deferred tax assets Tax loss carry forwards $ 475 $ 369 Alternative minimum tax (“AMT”) credits 22 11 Environmental rehabilitation 560 586 Property, plant and equipment 320 81 Post-retirement benefit obligations and other employee benefits 42 73 Accrued interest payable 61 51 Derivative instruments 106 32 Other 52 55

$ 1,638 $ 1,258 Deferred tax liabilities Property, plant and equipment (1,713) (2,216) Inventory (438) (404)

$ (513) $ (1,362)

Classification: Non-current assets $ 1,040 $ 674 Non-current liabilities (1,553) (2,036)

$ (513) $ (1,362)

The deferred tax asset of $1,040 million includes $925 million expected to be realized in more than one year. The deferred tax liability of $1,553 million includes $1,351 million expected to be realized in more than one year.



The non-capital tax losses include $8,872 million of losses which are not recognized in deferred tax assets. Of these, $627 million expire in 2016, $148 million expire in 2017, $4,937 million expire in 2018, $926 million expire in 2019, $1,365 million expire in 2020 or later, and $869 million have no expiry date.

The AMT credits include $112 million which are not recognized in deferred tax assets.

Recognition of Deferred Tax AssetsWe recognize deferred tax assets taking into account the effects of local tax law. Deferred tax assets are fully recognized when we conclude that sufficient positive evidence exists to demonstrate that it is probable that a deferred tax asset will be realized. The main factors considered are: Historic and expected future levels of taxable income; Tax plans that affect whether tax assets can be

realized; and The nature, amount and expected timing of reversal

of taxable temporary differences.

Levels of future income are mainly affected by: market gold, copper and silver prices; forecasted future costs and expenses to produce gold and copper reserves; quantities of proven and probable gold and copper reserves; market interest rates; and foreign currency exchange rates. If these factors or other circumstances change, we record an adjustment to the recognition of deferred assets to reflect our latest assessment of the amount of deferred tax assets that is probable will be realized.

A deferred income tax asset totaling $558 million (December 31, 2014: $505 million) has been recorded in Canada. This deferred tax asset primarily arose from derivative realized losses, finance costs, and general and administrative expenses. A deferred tax asset totaling $116 million (December 31, 2014: $nil) has been recorded in a foreign subsidiary. This deferred tax asset primarily arose from a realized loss on internal restructuring of subsidiary corporations. Projections of various sources of income support the conclusion that the realizability of these deferred tax assets is probable and consequently, we have fully recognized these deferred tax assets.

Deferred Tax Assets Not Recognized

As at As at Dec. 31, Dec. 31, 2015 2014

Australia and Papua New Guinea $ 383 $ 367 Canada 374 371 US 113 93 Dominican Republic 18 – Chile 787 776 Argentina 647 823 Barbados 72 68 Tanzania 131 92 Zambia 190 – Saudi Arabia 70 67

$ 2,785 $ 2,657

Expiry Dates of Tax Losses and AMT Credits No expiry 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020+ date Total

Non-capital tax losses1 Canada $ – $ – $ – $ – $ 1,539 $ – $ 1,539 Dominican Republic – – – – – 47 47 Barbados 627 148 4,751 926 725 – 7,177 Chile – – – – – 666 666 Tanzania – – – – – 179 179 Zambia – – 186 – 416 – 602 Other 9 5 7 – – 461 482

$ 636 $ 153 $ 4,944 $ 926 $ 2,680 $ 1,353 $ 10,692

AMT credits2 $ 134 $ 134

1. Represents the gross amount of tax loss carry forwards translated at closing exchange rates at December 31, 2015.2. Represents the amounts deductible against future taxes payable in years when taxes payable exceed “minimum tax” as defined by United States tax legislation.



Deferred Tax Assets Not Recognized relate to: non-capital loss carry forwards of $516 million (2014: $348 million), capital loss carry forwards with no expiry date of $602 million (2014: $518 million), US AMT credits of $112 million (2014: $92 million) and other deductible temporary differences with no expiry date of $1,555 million (2014: $1,699 million).

Source of Changes in Deferred Tax Balances


Temporary differences Property, plant and equipment $ 741 $ 228 Environmental rehabilitation (25) (17) Tax loss carry forwards 106 118 AMT credits 10 2 Inventory (34) 4 Derivatives 74 22 Other (23) 38

$ 849 $ 395

Intraperiod allocation to: Loss from continuing operations before income taxes $ 436 $ 380 Zaldívar disposition 388 – Cowal disposition 7 – OCI 20 15 Other (2) –

$ 849 $ 395

Income Tax Related Contingent Liabilities

2015 2014

At January 1 $ 49 $ 51 Additions based on tax positions related to the current year 13 1 Reductions for tax positions of prior years (1) (3)

At December 311 $ 61 $ 49

1. If reversed, the total amount of $61 million would be recognized as a benefit to income taxes on the income statement, and therefore would impact the reported effective tax rate.

We anticipate the amount of income tax related contingent liabilities to decrease within 12 months of the reporting date by approximately $1 million to $2 million, related primarily to the expected settlement of income tax and mining tax assessments.

We further anticipate that it is reasonably possible for the amount of income tax related contingent liabilities to decrease within 12 months of the reporting date by approximately $58 million through a potential settlement with tax authorities that may result in a reduction of available tax pools.

Tax Years Still Under Examination

Canada 2011–2015 United States 2015 Dominican Republic 2012–2015 Peru 2009, 2011–2015 Chile 2012–2015 Argentina 2008–2015 Australia 2011–2015 Papua New Guinea 2004–2015 Saudi Arabia 2007–2015 Tanzania All years open Zambia 2010–2015

30 Capital Stock

Authorized Capital StockOur authorized capital stock includes an unlimited number of common shares (issued 1,165,081,379 common shares); an unlimited number of first preferred shares issuable in series (the first series is designated as the “First Preferred Shares, Series A” and consists of 10,000,000 first preferred shares (issued nil); the second series is designated as the “First Preference Shares, Series B” and consists of 10,000,000 first preferred shares (issued nil); and the third series is designated as the “First Preferred Shares, Series C Special Voting Share” and consists of 1 Special Voting Share (issued nil)); and an unlimited number of second preferred shares issuable in series (the first series is designated as the “Second Preferred Shares, Series A” and consists of 15,000,000 second preferred shares (issued nil)). Our common shares have no par value.

DividendsIn 2015, we declared and paid dividends in US dollars totaling $0.14 per share, $160 million (2014: $0.20 per share, $232 million).

The Company implemented a dividend reinvestment plan in 2015 resulting in $3 million reinvested into the Company.



31 Non-Controlling Interests

a) Non-Controlling Interests Continuity

Pueblo Viejo Acacia Cerro Casale Other Total

NCI in subsidiary at December 31, 2015 40% 36.1% 25% Various

At January 1, 2014 $ 1,432 $ 522 $ 514 $ – $ 2,468 Share of income (loss) 89 62 (199) (4) (52) Cash contributed – – 4 25 29 Increase (decrease) in non-controlling interest1 – 174 – (4) 170

At December 31, 2014 $ 1,521 $ 758 $ 319 $ 17 $ 2,615 Share of loss (199) (69) (3) (4) (275) Cash contributed – – 2 39 41 Decrease in non-controlling interest2 (90) (12) – (2) (104)

At December 31, 2015 $ 1,232 $ 677 $ 318 $ 50 $ 2,277

1. Primarily represents the increase in non-controlling interests as a result of divestment of 10% of issued ordinary share capital of Acacia (see note 4g).2. Primarily represents disbursements made to non-controlling interest at Pueblo Viejo.

b) Summarized Financial Information on Subsidiaries with Material Non-Controlling InterestsSummarized Balance Sheets Pueblo Viejo Acacia Cerro Casale

As at As at As at As at As at As at Dec. 31, Dec. 31, Dec. 31, Dec. 31, Dec. 31, Dec. 31, 2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014

Current assets $ 667 $ 771 $ 528 $ 672 $ – $ 5 Non-current assets 3,540 5,209 1,699 1,810 557 561

Total assets $ 4,207 $ 5,980 $ 2,227 $ 2,482 $557 $ 566

Current liabilities 1,767 1,338 15 214 313 40 Non-current liabilities 499 1,175 340 365 42 42

Total liabilities $ 2,266 $ 2,513 $ 355 $ 579 $355 $ 82

Summarized Statements of Income Pueblo Viejo Acacia Cerro Casale


Revenue $1,332 $ 1,552 $ 860 $ 923 $ – $ – Income (loss) from continuing operations after tax (902) 311 (206) 79 (6) (1,018) Other comprehensive income (loss) – – – (1) – –

Total comprehensive income (loss) $ (902) $ 311 $(206) $ 78 $(6) $ (1,018)

Dividends paid to NCI $ – $ – $ 6 $ 5 $ – $ –



Under the terms of Pueblo Viejo’s project financing agreement described in note 24b, Pueblo Viejo Dominicana Corporation is prohibited from making cash payments to Barrick and Goldcorp in the form of dividends or certain shareholder loan interest and principal payments until Pueblo Viejo achieves specified requirements, including requirements relating to operational, social, and environmental matters.

The project financing agreement contains covenants which limit certain activities by Pueblo Viejo Dominicana, including Pueblo Viejo’s ability to sell assets and incur debt. Furthermore, Pueblo Viejo’s material tangible and intangible assets, including the proceeds from metal sales, are segregated and pledged for the benefit of the project lenders, thus restricting our access to those assets and our ability to use those assets to settle our liabilities to third parties.

32 Remuneration of Key Management Personnel

Key management personnel include the members of the Board of Directors and the Executive leadership team. Compensation for key management personnel (including Directors) was as follows:


Salaries and short-term employee benefits1 $ 31 $ 20 Post-employment benefits2 2 2 Termination Benefits – 11 Share-based payments and other3 6 6

$ 39 $ 39

1. Includes annual salary and annual short-term incentives/other bonuses earned in the year.

2. Represents Company contributions to retirement savings plans.3. Relates to stock option, RSU, PGSU and PRSU grants and other compensation.

a) Stock OptionsUnder Barrick’s stock option plan, certain officers and key employees of the Corporation may purchase common shares at an exercise price that is equal to the closing share price on the day before the grant of the option. The grant date is the date when the details of the award, including the number of options granted by individual and the exercise price, are approved. Stock options vest evenly over four years, beginning in the year after granting. Options are exercisable over seven years. At December 31, 2015, 2.9 million (2014: 5.4 million) common shares were available for granting options.

Compensation expense for stock options was $2 million in 2015 (2014: $5 million recovery), and is presented as a component of corporate administration and operating segment administration, consistent with the classification of other elements of compensation expense for those employees who had stock options. The recognition of compensation expense for stock options reduced earnings per share for 2015 by $nil (2014: $nil).

Total intrinsic value relating to options exercised in 2015 was $nil (2014: $nil).

33 Stock-Based Compensation

Summarized Statements of Cash Flows Pueblo Viejo Acacia Cerro Casale


Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities $ 471 $ 533 $ 165 $ 286 $ (5) $ (2) Net cash used in investing activities (100) (184) (189) (255) – (1) Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities (301) (101) (37) (19) 2 4

Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents $ 70 $ 248 $ (61) $ 12 $ (3) $ 1



As at December 31, 2015, there was $1 million (2014: $3 million) of total unrecognized compensation cost relating to unvested stock options. We expect to recognize this cost over a weighted average period of 1 year (2014: 1 year).

b) Restricted Share Units (RSUs) and Deferred Share Units (DSUs)

Under our RSU plan, selected employees are granted RSUs where each RSU has a value equal to one Barrick common share. RSUs generally vest from two-and-a-half years to three years and are settled in cash upon vesting. Additional RSUs are credited to reflect dividends paid on Barrick common shares over the vesting period.

Compensation expense for RSUs incorporates an expected forfeiture rate. The expected forfeiture rate is estimated based on historical forfeiture rates and expectations of future forfeiture rates. We make adjustments if the actual forfeiture rate differs from the expected rate. At December 31, 2015, the weighted average remaining contractual life of RSUs was 1.37 years (2014: 1.46 years).

Compensation expense for RSUs was a $5 million credit to earnings in 2015 (2014: $8 million) and is presented as a component of corporate administration and operating segment administration, consistent with the classification of other elements of compensation expense for those employees who had RSUs.

Employee Stock Option Activity (Number of Shares in Millions) 2015 2014

Shares Average price Shares Average price

C$ options At January 1 0.2 $19 0.1 $ 19 Granted 0.2 10 0.1 20 Exercised – – – – Cancelled/expired (0.1) 20 – –

At December 31 0.3 $13 0.2 $ 19

US$ options At January 1 5.2 $41 6.4 $ 41 Granted – – – – Exercised – – – – Forfeited (0.3) 46 (0.3) 42 Cancelled/expired (2.3) 40 (0.9) 41

At December 31 2.6 $42 5.2 $ 41

Stock Options Outstanding (Number of Shares in Millions)

Outstanding Exercisable

Intrinsic Intrinsic Average Average value1 Average value1 Range of exercise prices Shares price life (years) ($ millions) Shares price ($ millions)

C$ options $ 9 – $ 17 0.2 $ 10 6.6 $ – – $ – $ – $ 18 – $ 21 0.1 18 4.6 (1) 0.1 18 –

0.3 $ 13 5.9 $ (1) 0.1 $ 18 $ –

US$ options $ 28 – $ 41 1.2 $ 33 3.9 $ (30) 0.7 $ 33 $ (18) $ 42 – $ 55 1.4 50 2.2 (59) 1.3 50 (55)

2.6 $ 42 3.0 $ (89) 2.0 $ 44 $ (73)

1. Based on the closing market share price on December 31, 2014 of C$12.52 and US$10.75.



Under our DSU plan, Directors must receive a specified portion of their basic annual retainer in the form of DSUs, with the option to elect to receive 100% of such retainer in DSUs. Officers may also elect to receive a portion or all of their incentive compensation in the form of DSUs. Each DSU has the same value as one Barrick common share. DSUs must be retained until the Director or officer leaves the Board or Barrick, at which time the cash value of the DSUs will be paid out. Additional DSUs are credited to reflect dividends paid on Barrick common shares. DSUs are recorded at fair value on the grant date and are adjusted for changes in fair value. The fair value of amounts granted each period together with changes in fair value are expensed.

DSU and RSU Activity Fair Fair DSUs value RSUs value (thousands) ($ millions) (thousands) ($ millions)

At January 1, 2014 201 $ 4.7 2,850 $ 29.8 Settled for cash (53) (0.6) (992) (17.2) Forfeited – – (629) (11.5) Granted 113 1.6 2,327 42.9 Credits for dividends – – 49 0.7 Change in value – (2.9) – (14.6)

At December 31, 2014 261 $ 2.8 3,605 $ 30.1 Settled for cash (34) (0.2) (1,492) (11.1) Forfeited – – (54) (0.6) Granted 238 2.0 4,458 48.9 Credits for dividends – – 110 1.0 Change in value – (1.1) – (29.0)

At December 31, 2015 465 $ 3.5 6,627 $ 39.3

c) Performance Restricted Share Units (PRSUs)In 2008, Barrick launched a PRSU plan. Under this plan, selected employees are granted PRSUs, where each PRSU has a value equal to one Barrick common share. At December 31, 2015, 1,169 thousand units were outstanding at a fair value of $6 million (2014: 1,675 thousand units, fair value $6 million).

d) Performance Granted Share Units (PGSUs)In 2014, Barrick launched a PGSU plan. Under this plan, selected employees are granted PGSUs, where each PGSU has a value equal to one Barrick common share. At December 31, 2015, 589 units had been granted at a fair value of $1 million (2014: nil).

e) Employee Share Purchase Plan (ESPP)In 2008, Barrick launched an Employee Share Purchase Plan. This plan enables Barrick employees to purchase Company shares through payroll deduction. During 2015, Barrick contributed and expensed $0.4 million to this plan (2014: $0.6 million).

34 Post-Retirement Benefits

Barrick operates various post-employment plans, including both defined benefit and defined contribution pension plans and other post-retirement plans. The table below outlines where the Company’s post-employment amounts and activity are included in the financial statements:


Balance sheet obligations for: Defined pension benefits $ 80 $ 96 Other post-retirement benefits 6 7

Liability in the balance sheet $ 86 $ 103

Income statement charge included income statement for: Defined pension benefits $ 3 $ 3 Other post-retirement benefits – –

$ 3 $ 3

Measurements for: Defined pension benefits $ 7 $ (29) Other post-retirement benefits 1 (1)

$ 8 $ (30)



The significant actuarial assumptions were as follows: Other Post-Retirement Other Post-Retirement As at December 31 Pension Plans 2015 Benefits 2015 Pension Plans 2014 Benefits 2014

Discount rate 2.10–4.25% 3.85% 1.95–4.05% 3.40–3.55%

b) Other Post-Retirement Benefits We provide post-retirement medical, dental, and life insurance benefits to certain employees in the US. All of these plans are unfunded.

The movement in the defined benefit liability over the year is as follows: Present value Fair value of of obligation plan assets Total

At January 1, 2014 $ 6 $ – $ 6 Remeasurements: Loss from demographic assumptions 1 – 1

At December 31, 2014 $ 7 $ – $ 7 Remeasurements: Gain from demographic assumptions (1) – (1)

At December 31, 2015 $ 6 $ – $ 6

The weighted average duration of the defined benefit obligation is 11 years (2014: 11 years).

Less Between Between than a 1–2 2–5 Over 5 year years years years Total

Pension benefits $ 20 $ 20 $ 60 $ 421 $ 521 Other post- retirement benefits 1 1 2 5 9

At December 31, 2014 $ 21 $ 21 $ 62 $ 426 $ 530

Pension benefits $ 19 $ 19 $ 56 $ 364 $ 458 Other post-retirement benefits 1 1 2 6 10

At December 31, 2015 $ 20 $ 20 $ 58 $ 370 $ 468

c) Defined Contribution Pension PlansCertain employees take part in defined contribution employee benefit plans and we also have a retirement plan for certain officers of the Company. Our share of contributions to these plans, which is expensed in the year it is earned by the employee, was $38 million in 2015 (2014: $42 million).

The amounts recognized in the balance sheet are determined as follows:


Present value of funded obligations $ 219 $ 241 Fair value of plan assets (201) (218)

Deficit of funded plans $ 18 $ 23 Present value of unfunded obligations 62 73

Total deficit of defined benefit pension plans $ 80 $ 96 Impact of minimum funding requirement/ asset ceiling – –

Liability in the balance sheet $ 80 $ 96

a) Defined Benefit Pension Plans We have qualified defined benefit pension plans that cover certain of our former United States and Canadian employees and provide benefits based on an employee’s years of service. The plans operate under similar regulatory frameworks and generally face similar risks. The majority of benefit payments are from trustee-administered funds; however, there are also a number of unfunded plans where the Company meets the benefit payment obligation as it falls due. Plan assets held in trust are governed by local regulations and practice in each country. Responsibility for governance of the plans – overseeing all aspects of the plans including investment decisions and contribution schedules – lies with the Company. We have set up pension committees to assist in the management of the plans and have also appointed experienced independent professional experts such as actuaries, custodians and trustees.



35 Contingencies

On April 1, 2015, the Court issued its ruling on the Defendants’ motion to dismiss. The Court dismissed the plaintiffs’ claims relating to the cost and scheduling of the Project. However, the Court allowed the plaintiffs’ claims relating to the environmental risks of the Project and alleged internal control failures to go forward. The Court denied Barrick’s motion for reconsideration of certain aspects of that ruling on June 2, 2015, and discovery is continuing in the case. The Company intends to vigorously defend this matter. No amounts have been recorded for any potential liability arising from this matter, as the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome.

Proposed Canadian Securities Class ActionsBetween April and September 2014, eight proposed class actions were commenced against the Company in Canada in connection with the Pascua-Lama project. Four of the proceedings were commenced in Ontario, two were commenced in Alberta, one was commenced in Saskatchewan, and one was commenced in Quebec. The allegations in each of the eight Canadian proceedings are substantially similar to those in the Complaint filed by lead counsel and plaintiffs in the U.S. shareholder class action (see “U.S. Shareholder Class Action” above). Of the eight proposed class actions, three of the Ontario claims, both of the Alberta claims, the Quebec claim and the Saskatchewan claim have been formally served on the Company.

The first Ontario and Alberta actions were commenced by Statement of Claim on April 15, 2014 and April 17, 2014, respectively, and served on May 20, 2014 and July 29, 2014, respectively. The same law firm acts for the plaintiffs in these two proceedings, and the Statements of Claim are largely identical. Aaron Regent, Jamie Sokalsky and Ammar Al-Joundi are also named as defendants in the two actions. Both actions purport to be on behalf of anyone who, during the period from May 7, 2009 to May 23, 2013, purchased Barrick securities in Canada. Both actions seek $4.3 billion in general damages and $350 million in special damages for alleged misrepresentations in the Company’s public disclosure. The first Alberta action was discontinued by plaintiffs’ counsel on June 26, 2015.

Certain conditions may exist as of the date the financial statements are issued that may result in a loss to the Company, but which will only be resolved when one or more future events occur or fail to occur. The impact of any resulting loss from such matters affecting these financial statements and noted below may be material.

Litigation and ClaimsIn assessing loss contingencies related to legal proceedings that are pending against us or unasserted claims that may result in such proceedings, the Company with assistance from its legal counsel evaluate the perceived merits of any legal proceedings or unasserted claims as well as the perceived merits of the amount of relief sought or expected to be sought.

U.S. Shareholder Class Action On December 6, 2013, lead counsel and plaintiffs in the securities class action filed a consolidated amended complaint (the “Complaint”) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Court”), on behalf of anyone who purchased the common stock of the Company between May 7, 2009, and November 1, 2013. The Complaint asserts claims against the Company and individual defendants Jamie Sokalsky, Aaron Regent, Ammar Al-Joundi, Igor Gonzales, Peter Kinver, George Potter and Sybil Veenman (collectively, the “Defendants”). The Complaint alleges that the Defendants made false and misleading statements to the investing public relating (among other things) to the cost of the Pascua-Lama project (the “Project”), the amount of time it would take before production commenced at the Project, and the environmental risks of the Project, as well as alleged internal control failures. The Complaint seeks an unspecified amount of damages.

The Complaint largely tracks the legal theories advanced in three prior complaints filed on June 5, 2013, June 14, 2013 and August 2, 2013. The Court consolidated those complaints and appointed lead counsel and lead plaintiffs for the resulting consolidated action in September 2013.



The second Ontario action was commenced by Notice of Action on April 24, 2014, and the Statement of Claim was served on May 27, 2014. Aaron Regent, Jamie Sokalsky, Ammar Al-Joundi and Peter Kinver are also named as defendants. Following a September 8, 2014 amendment to the Statement of Claim, this action purports to be on behalf of anyone who acquired Barrick securities during the period from October 29, 2010 to October 30, 2013, and seeks $3 billion in damages for alleged misrepresentations in the Company’s public disclosure. The amended claim also reflects the addition of a law firm that previously acted as counsel in a third Ontario action, which was commenced by Notice of Action on April 28, 2014 and included similar allegations but was never served and is not expected to be pursued.

The Quebec action was commenced and served on April 30, 2014. Aaron Regent, Jamie Sokalsky, Ammar Al-Joundi and Peter Kinver are also named as defendants. This action purports to be on behalf of any person who resides in Quebec and acquired Barrick securities during the period from May 7, 2009 to November 1, 2013. The action seeks unspecified damages for alleged misrepresentations in the Company’s public disclosure.

The second Alberta action was commenced by Statement of Claim on May 23, 2014, and served on June 6, 2014. Aaron Regent, Jamie Sokalsky, Ammar Al-Joundi and Peter Kinver are also named as defendants. This action purports to be on behalf of any person who acquired Barrick securities during the period from May 7, 2009 to November 1, 2013, and seeks $6 billion in damages for alleged misrepresentations in the Company’s public disclosure.

The Saskatchewan action was commenced by Statement of Claim on May 26, 2014, and served on May 28, 2014. Aaron Regent, Jamie Sokalsky, Ammar Al-Joundi and Peter Kinver are also named as defendants. This action purports to be on behalf of any person who acquired Barrick securities during the period from May 7, 2009 to November 1, 2013, and seeks $6 billion in damages for alleged misrepresentations in the Company’s public disclosure.

The fourth Ontario action was commenced on September 5, 2014. Aaron Regent, Jamie Sokalsky, Ammar Al-Joundi and Peter Kinver are also named as defendants. This action purports to be on behalf of any person who acquired Barrick securities during the period from May 7, 2009 to November 1, 2013 in Canada. The action seeks $3 billion in damages plus an unspecified amount for alleged misrepresentations in the Company’s public disclosure. The Statement of Claim was amended on October 20, 2014, to include two additional law firms, one of which is acting as counsel in the first Ontario action referred to above. The Amended Statement of Claim was served on October 22, 2014.

In November 2014, an Ontario court heard a motion to determine which of the competing counsel groups will take the lead in the Ontario litigation. On December 10, 2014, the court issued a decision in favor of the counsel group that commenced the first and fourth Ontario actions, which will be consolidated in a single action. On May 21, 2015, the Divisional Court affirmed the lower court’s decision. The losing counsel group sought and obtained leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal for Ontario. The appeal is scheduled to be heard in April 2016.

The Company intends to vigorously defend all of the proposed Canadian securities class actions. No amounts have been recorded for any potential liability arising from any of the proposed class actions, as the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome.

Pascua-Lama – SMA Regulatory Sanctions In May 2013, Compañía Minera Nevada (“CMN”), Barrick’s Chilean subsidiary that holds the Chilean portion of the Pascua-Lama project (the “Project”), received a Resolution (the “Resolution”) from Chile’s environmental regulator (the Superintendencia del Medio Ambiente, or “SMA”) that requires the company to complete the water management system for the Project in accordance with the Project’s environmental permit before resuming construction activities in Chile. The Resolution also required CMN to pay an administrative fine of approximately $16 million for deviations from



certain requirements of the Project’s Chilean environmental approval, including a series of reporting requirements and instances of non-compliance related to the Project’s water management system. CMN paid the administrative fine in May 2013.

In June 2013, CMN began engineering studies to review the Project’s water management system in accordance with the Resolution. These studies indicate that an increase in the capacity of the final water management system for the Project may be required above the volume approved in the Project’s Chilean environmental approval. The studies were suspended in the second half of 2015 as a result of CMN’s decision to file a temporary and partial closure plan for the Project (for more information about this plan, see “Pascua-Lama – Constitutional Protection Action” below) and the fact that CMN is currently modifying certain aspects of the existing water management system. An increase in the capacity of the final water management system may require a new environmental approval and the construction of additional water management facilities, which could impact the schedule and estimated budget for completion of water management activities in Chile to the satisfaction of the authorities.

In June 2013, a group of local farmers and indigenous communities challenged the Resolution. The challenge, which was brought in the Environmental Court of Santiago, Chile (the “Environmental Court”), claims that the fine was inadequate and requests more severe sanctions against CMN including the revocation of the Project’s environmental permit. The SMA presented its defense of the Resolution in July 2013. On August 2, 2013, CMN joined as a party to this proceeding and vigorously defended the Resolution. On March 3, 2014, the Environmental Court annulled the Resolution and remanded the matter back to the SMA for further consideration in accordance with its decision (the “Environmental Court Decision”). In particular, the Environmental Court ordered the SMA to issue a new administrative decision that recalculates the amount of the fine to be paid by CMN using a different methodology and addresses certain other errors it identified in the

Resolution. A new resolution from the SMA could include more severe sanctions against CMN such as a material increase in the amount of the fine above the approximately $16 million imposed by the SMA in May 2013 and/or the revocation of the Project’s environmental permit. The Environmental Court did not annul the portion of the SMA Resolution that required the Company to halt construction on the Chilean side of the project until the water management system is completed in accordance with the project’s environmental permit. On December 30, 2014, the Chilean Supreme Court declined to consider CMN’s appeal of the Environmental Court Decision on procedural grounds. As a result of the Supreme Court’s ruling, on April 22, 2015, the SMA reopened the administrative proceeding against CMN in accordance with the Environmental Court Decision.

On May 14, 2015, CMN filed a petition to limit the scope of the new administrative proceeding to the original allegations considered by the environmental regulator at the time it issued the Resolution and to assert additional defenses. CMN presented supporting documents and witness testimony in January 2016 in response to an order from the SMA. The SMA also conducted a site visit in January 2016. A final resolution from the SMA in this matter is pending.

Also on April 22, 2015, CMN was notified that the SMA has initiated a new administrative proceeding for alleged deviations from certain requirements of the Project’s environmental approval, including with respect to the Project’s environmental impact and a series of monitoring requirements. In May 2015, CMN submitted a compliance program to address certain of the allegations and presented its defense to the remainder of the alleged deviations. The SMA rejected CMN’s proposed compliance program on June 24, 2015, and denied CMN’s administrative appeal of that decision on July 31, 2015. CMN appealed the SMA’s decision to the Environmental Court, which held a hearing on November 26, 2015. Decisions are pending from the Environmental Court with respect to CMN’s appeal and from the SMA with respect to CMN’s defense to the remainder of the alleged deviations. The new



administrative proceeding against CMN is separate from the original administrative proceeding described above, and could result in additional sanctions including new administrative fines and/or the revocation of the Project’s environmental permit.

The Company has recorded an estimated amount for the potential liability arising from administrative fines in these matters. In the Company’s view, it would be prejudicial to disclose the amount of that estimate as the proceedings are ongoing and the SMA has not issued any additional proposed administrative fines.

Pascua-Lama – Constitutional Protection Action CMN filed a temporary and partial closure plan for the Pascua-Lama project (the “Temporary Closure Plan”) with the Chilean mining authority (Sernageomin) on August 31, 2015. Sernageomin approved the Temporary Closure Plan on September 29, 2015, and issued a resolution requiring CMN to comply with certain closure-related maintenance and monitoring obligations for a period of two years. The Temporary Closure Plan does not address certain facilities, including the Project’s water management system, which remain subject to the requirements of the Project’s original environmental approval and other regulations.

On December 4, 2015, a constitutional protection action was filed in the Court of Appeals of Santiago, Chile by a group of local farmers and other individuals against CMN and Sernageomin in order to challenge the Temporary Closure Plan and the resolution that approved it. The plaintiffs assert that the Temporary Closure Plan cannot be approved until the water management system for the Project has been completed in accordance with the Project’s environmental permit. The action has been admitted for review by the court, which is expected to schedule a hearing in this matter prior to issuing a decision. The Company intends to vigorously defend this matter. No amounts have been recorded for any potential liability arising from this matter, as the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome.

Veladero On September 13, 2015, a valve on a leach pad pipeline at the Company’s Veladero mine in San Juan Province, Argentina failed, resulting in a release of cyanide-bearing process solution into a nearby waterway through a diversion channel gate that was open at the time of the incident. Minera Argentina Gold S.A. (“MAGSA”), Barrick’s Argentine subsidiary that operates the Veladero mine, notified regulatory authorities of the situation. Environmental monitoring was conducted by MAGSA and independent third parties following the incident. The Company believes this monitoring demonstrates that the incident posed no risk to human health at downstream communities. A temporary restriction on the addition of new cyanide to the mine’s processing circuit was lifted on September 24, 2015, and mine operations have returned to normal. Monitoring and inspection of the mine site will continue in accordance with a court order.

On October 9, 2015, the San Juan mining authority initiated an administrative sanction process against MAGSA for alleged violations of the mining code relating to the valve failure and release of cyanide-bearing process solution. MAGSA submitted its response to these allegations in October 2015 and provided additional information in January 2016. This process is expected to result in a fine. A decision from the San Juan mining authority is pending. No amounts have been recorded for any potential liability under this matter, as the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome.

Pueblo Viejo – Amparo ActionIn October 2014, Pueblo Viejo Dominicana Corporation (“PVDC”) received a copy of an action filed in an administrative court (the “Administrative Court”) in the Dominican Republic by Rafael Guillen Beltre (the “Petitioner”), who claims to be affiliated with the Dominican Christian Peace Organization. The action alleges that environmental contamination in the vicinity of the Pueblo Viejo mine has caused illness and affected water quality in violation of the Petitioner’s fundamental



rights under the Dominican Constitution and other laws. The primary relief sought in the action, which is styled as an “Amparo” remedy, is the suspension of operations at the Pueblo Viejo mine as well as other mining projects in the area until an investigation into the alleged environmental contamination has been completed by the relevant governmental authorities. On November 21, 2014, the Administrative Court granted PVDC’s motion to remand the matter to a trial court in the Municipality of Cotuí (the “Trial Court”) on procedural grounds. On June 25, 2015, the Trial Court rejected the Petitioner’s amparo action, finding that the Petitioner failed to produce evidence to support his allegations. The Petitioner appealed the Trial Court’s decision to the Constitutional Court on July 21, 2015. On July 28, 2015, PVDC filed a motion to challenge the timeliness of this appeal as it was submitted after the expiration of the applicable filing deadline. The Company intends to vigorously defend this matter. No amounts have been recorded for any potential liability or asset impairment arising from this matter, as the Company cannot reasonably predict any potential losses.

Argentine Glacier Legislation and Constitutional LitigationOn September 30, 2010, the National Law on Minimum Requirements for the Protection of Glaciers was enacted in Argentina, and came into force in early November 2010. The federal law bans new mining exploration and exploitation activities on glaciers and in the “peri-glacial” environment, and subjects ongoing mining activities to an environmental audit. If such audit identifies significant impacts on glaciers and peri-glacial environment, the relevant authority is empowered to take action, which according to the legislation could include the suspension or relocation of the activity. In the case of the Veladero mine and the Pascua-Lama project, the competent authority is the Province of San Juan. In late January 2013, the Province announced that it had completed the required environmental audit, which concluded that Veladero and Pascua-Lama do not impact glaciers or peri-glaciers.

The constitutionality of the federal glacier law is the subject of a challenge before the National Supreme Court of Argentina, which has not yet ruled on the issue. On October 27, 2014, the Company submitted its response to a motion by the federal government to dismiss the constitutional challenge to the federal glacier law on standing grounds. A decision on the motion is pending. If the federal government’s arguments with respect to standing are accepted then the case will be dismissed. If they are not accepted then the National Supreme Court of Argentina will proceed to hear evidence on the merits. No amounts have been recorded for any potential liability or asset impairment under this matter, as the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome and in any event the provincial audit concluded that the Company’s activities do not impact glaciers or peri-glaciers.

Perilla ComplaintIn 2009, Barrick Gold Inc. and Placer Dome Inc. were purportedly served in Ontario with a complaint filed in November 2008 in the Regional Trial Court of Boac (the “Court”), on the Philippine island of Marinduque, on behalf of two named individuals and purportedly on behalf of the approximately 200,000 residents of Marinduque. The complaint alleges injury to the economy and the ecology of Marinduque as a result of the discharge of mine tailings from the Marcopper mine into Calancan Bay, the Boac River, and the Mogpog River. The plaintiffs are claiming for abatement of a public nuisance allegedly caused by the tailings discharge and for nominal damages for an alleged violation of their constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology. In June 2010, Barrick Gold Inc. and Placer Dome Inc. filed a motion to have the Court resolve their unresolved motions to dismiss before considering the plaintiffs’ motion to admit an amended complaint and also filed an opposition to the plaintiffs’ motion to admit on the same basis. It is not known when these motions or the outstanding motions to dismiss will be decided by the Court. The Company intends to defend the action vigorously. No amounts have been recorded for any potential liability under this complaint, as the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome.



Writ of Kalikasan In February 2011, a Petition for the Issuance of a Writ of Kalikasan with Prayer for Temporary Environmental Protection Order was filed in the Supreme Court of the Republic of the Philippines (the “Supreme Court”) in Eliza M. Hernandez, Mamerto M. Lanete and Godofredo L. Manoy versus Placer Dome Inc. and Barrick Gold Corporation (the “Petition”). In March 2011, the Supreme Court issued an En Banc Resolution and Writ of Kalikasan, directed service of summons on Placer Dome Inc. and the Company, ordered Placer Dome Inc. and the Company to make a verified return of the Writ with ten (10) days of service and referred the case to the Court of Appeal for hearing. The Petition alleges that Placer Dome Inc. violated the petitioners’ constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology as a result of, among other things, the discharge of tailings into Calancan Bay, the 1993 Maguila-Guila dam break, the 1996 Boac river tailings spill and failure of Marcopper to properly decommission the Marcopper mine. The petitioners have pleaded that the Company is liable for the alleged actions and omissions of Placer Dome Inc., which was a minority indirect shareholder of Marcopper at all relevant times, and is seeking orders requiring the Company to environmentally remediate the areas in and around the mine site that are alleged to have sustained environmental impacts. The petitioners purported to serve the Company in March 2011, following which the Company filed an Urgent Motion For Ruling on Jurisdiction with the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of the Rules of Procedure in Environmental Cases (the “Environmental Rules”) pursuant to which the Petition was filed, as well as the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court over the Company. In November 2011, two local governments, or “baranguays” (Baranguay San Antonio and Baranguay Lobo) filed a motion with the Supreme Court seeking intervenor status with the intention of seeking a dismissal of the proceedings. No decision has as yet been issued with respect to the Urgent Motion for Ruling on Jurisdiction, the motion for intervention, or certain other matters before the Supreme Court. The Company intends to continue to defend the action vigorously. No amounts have been recorded for any potential liability under this matter, as the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome.

Cerro CasaleOne of the environmental permits related to the open pit and water management system at the Company’s 75 percent-owned Cerro Casale project in Chile is subject to an environmental regulation (the “Regulation”) that, if applied as written, would have required the Company to begin construction of the project by January 26, 2015 or risk cancellation of the environmental permit. The Company sought relief from the Regulation as construction was not feasible and did not begin by that date. On October 15, 2015, the Chilean environmental authority issued a resolution confirming that initial project activities were timely commenced as required by the environmental permit and the matter is now closed. Permits required for the majority of the project’s proposed operations were obtained under a second environmental approval (the “Cerro Casale environmental permit”) that is subject to a January 2018 construction deadline. The Company expects to obtain relief from this deadline through the procedure outlined above.

The Cerro Casale environmental permit was challenged in 2013 by local and indigenous community members for alleged procedural deficiencies in the community consultation process and other aspects of the evaluation of the project by the Chilean environmental authority. The challenge was brought before the Chilean cabinet, which has jurisdiction over procedural claims of this nature. On January 19, 2015, the cabinet ministers rejected the majority of claims made against the Cerro Casale environmental permit while also imposing new limitations on the volume of groundwater that the project may extract for mining operations. The Company appealed this decision to the Environmental Court, which held a hearing on August 27, 2015. A decision of the Environmental Court is pending in this matter. The Company intends to defend the action vigorously. No amounts have been recorded for any potential liability or asset impairment arising from this matter, as the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome.

SHAREHOLDER INFORMATION


Shareholder Information

Shares are traded on two stock exchanges

New YorkToronto

Ticker SymbolABX

Number of Registered Shareholders at December 31, 201516,768

Index ListingsS&P/TSX Composite IndexS&P/TSX 60 IndexS&P Global 1200 IndexPhiladelphia Gold/Silver IndexNYSE Arca Gold Miners Index Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI) – North AmericaDow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI) – World

2015 Dividend per ShareUS$0.14

Common Shares(millions)

Outstanding at December 31, 2015 1,165

Weighted average 2015 Basic 1,165 Fully diluted 1,165

The Company’s shares were split on a two-for-one basis in 1987, 1989 and 1993.

Volume of Shares Traded(millions) 2015 2014

NYSE 1,437 902 TSX 766 682

Closing Price of SharesDecember 31, 2015

NYSE US$7.38 TSX C$10.24

Share Trading Information

New York Stock Exchange Share Volume (millions) High Low

Quarter 2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014

First 353 223 US$13.25 US$21.45 US$10.15 US$17.59 Second 243 176 13.70 19.22 10.57 15.47 Third 468 166 11.00 19.48 5.91 14.56 Fourth 373 337 8.32 15.03 6.14 10.05

1,437 902

Toronto Stock Exchange Share Volume (millions) High Low

Quarter 2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014

First 184 199 C$16.54 C$23.78 C$12.15 C$19.00 Second 133 157 16.40 20.97 13.15 16.81 Third 229 131 13.92 21.14 7.89 16.32 Fourth 220 195 10.97 16.80 8.15 11.67

766 682

SHAREHOLDER INFORMATION


Dividend Policy The Board of Directors reviews the dividend policy quarterly based on the cash requirements of the Company’s operating assets, exploration and development activities, as well as potential acquisitions, combined with the current and projected financial position of the Company.

Dividend PaymentsIn 2015, the Company paid a cash dividend of $0.14 per share – $0.05 on March 16, $0.05 on June 15, $0.02 on September 15, and $0.02 on December 15. A cash dividend of $0.20 per share was paid in 2014 – $0.05 on March 17, $0.05 on June 16, $0.05 on September 15, and $0.05 on December 15.

Form 40-FThe Company’s Annual Report on Form 40-F is filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. This report is available on Barrick’s website www.barrick.com and will be made available to shareholders, without charge, upon written request to the Secretary of the Company at the Head Office at [email protected] or at 416-861-9911.

Shareholder ContactsShareholders are welcome to contact the Investor Relations Department for general information on the Company at [email protected] or at 416-861-9911.

For information on such matters as share transfers, dividend cheques and change of address, inquiries should be directed to the Company’s Transfer Agents.

Transfer Agents and RegistrarsCST Trust CompanyP.O. Box 700, Postal Station BMontreal, Quebec, Canada H3B 3K3 orAmerican Stock Transfer & Trust Company, LLC6201 – 15th AvenueBrooklyn, NY 11219, USA

Tel: 1-800-387-0825 Toll-free throughout North America Fax: 1-888-249-6189

Email: [email protected] Website: www.canstockta.com

AuditorsPricewaterhouseCoopers LLPToronto, Canada

Annual MeetingThe Annual Meeting of Shareholders will be held on Tuesday, April 26, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. (Toronto time) in the Metro Toronto Convention Centre, John Bassett Theatre, 255 Front Street West, Toronto, Ontario.

2015 was a watershed

year for Barrick in which we

delivered on our promises

and fulfilled our four strategic

priorities. We did what we

said we would do—we streamlined the business,

strengthened the balance sheet, generated free

cash flow, and further focused our portfolio

around our core mines in the Americas. In 2016,

we will continue to build on our achievements

as we focus our efforts on growing free cash

flow through further debt and cost reduction.”

1234

Our vision is the generation of wealth through responsible mining—wealth for our owners, our people, and the countries and communities with which we partner. We aim to be the leading mining company focused on gold, growing our cash flow per share by developing and operating high-quality assets through disciplined allocation of human and financial capital and operational excellence.

Our Vision Scorecard

Message from the Chairman 4 | Message from the President 8 | Board of Directors 14 | Corporate Governance and Committees of the Board 15 | Executive Officers and Advisory Boards 16 | Partners 17 | Management’s Discussion and Analysis 18 | Mineral Reserves and Resources 87 | Financial Statements 99 | Notes to Financial Statements 104 | Shareholder Information 171

“

Kelvin Dushnisky, President


changes in our credit ratings; the impact of inflation; fluctuations in the currency markets; changes in U.S. dollar interest rates; risks arising from holding derivative instruments; changes in national and local government legislation, taxation, controls or regulations and/or changes in the administration of laws, policies and practices, expropriation or nationalization of property and political or economic developments in Canada, the United States and other jurisdictions in which the company does or may carry on business in the future; damage to the company’s reputation due to the actual or perceived occurrence of any number of events, including negative publicity with respect to the company’s handling of environmental matters or dealings with community groups, whether true or not; the possibility that future exploration results will not be consistent with the company’s expectations; risks that exploration data may be incomplete and considerable additional work may be required to complete further evaluation, including but not limited to drilling, engineering and socio-economic studies and investment; risk of loss due to acts of war, terrorism, sabotage and civil disturbances; litigation; contests over title to properties, particularly title to undeveloped properties, or over access to water, power and other required infrastructure; business opportunities that may be presented to, or pursued by, the company; our ability to successfully integrate acquisitions or complete divestitures; employee relations; increased costs and risks related to the potential impact of climate change; availability and increased costs associated with mining inputs and labor; and the organization of our previously held African gold operations and properties under a separate listed company. In addition, there are risks and hazards associated with the business of mineral exploration, development and mining, including environmental hazards, industrial accidents, unusual or unexpected formations, pressures, cave-ins, flooding and gold bullion, copper cathode or gold or copper concentrate losses (and the risk of inadequate insurance, or inability to obtain insurance, to cover these risks).

Many of these uncertainties and contingencies can affect our actual results and could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in any forward-looking statements made by, or on behalf of, us. Readers are cautioned that forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance. All of the forward-looking statements made in this Annual Report 2015 are qualified by these cautionary statements. Specific reference is made to the most recent Form 40-F/Annual Information Form on file with the SEC and Canadian provincial securities regulatory authorities for a more detailed discussion of some of the factors underlying forward-looking statements and the risks that may affect Barrick’s ability to achieve the expectations set forth in the forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report 2015.

The company disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by applicable law.

Certain information contained or incorporated by reference in this Annual Report 2015, including any information as to our strategy, projects, plans or future financial or operating performance, constitutes “forward-looking statements”. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, are forward-looking statements. The words “believe”, “expect”, “anticipate”, “contemplate”, “target”, “plan”, “objective” “aspiration”, “aim”, “intend”, “project”, “continue”, “budget”, “estimate”, “potential”, “may”, “will”, “can”, “could”, and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements. In particular, this Annual Report 2015 contains forward-looking statements including, without limitation, with respect to: (i) Barrick’s forward-looking production guidance; (ii) estimates of future all-in sustaining costs per ounce/pound, cash costs per ounce and C1 cash costs per pound; (iii) cash flow forecasts; (iv) projected capital, operating and exploration expenditures; (v) targeted debt and cost reductions; (vi) mine life and production rates; (vii) potential mineralization and metal or mineral recoveries; (viii) Barrick’s Best in Class program (including potential improvements to financial and operating performance and mine life that may result from certain Best in Class initiatives); (ix) expectations regarding future price assumptions, financial performance and other outlook or guidance; and (x) the estimated timing and conclusions of technical reports and other studies. Forward-looking statements are necessarily based upon a number of estimates and assumptions that, while considered reasonable by the company as at the date of this news release in light of management’s experience and perception of current conditions and expected developments, are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies. Known and unknown factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements and undue reliance should not be placed on such statements and information. Such factors include, but are not limited to: fluctuations in the spot and forward price of gold, copper or certain other commodities (such as silver, diesel fuel, natural gas and electricity); the speculative nature of mineral exploration and development; changes in mineral production performance, exploitation and exploration successes; risks associated with the fact that certain Best in Class initiatives are still in the early stages of evaluation and additional engineering and other analysis is required to fully assess their impact; diminishing quantities or grades of reserves; increased costs, delays, suspensions and technical challenges associated with the construction of capital projects; operating or technical difficulties in connection with mining or development activities, including disruptions in the maintenance or provision of required infrastructure and information technology systems; failure to comply with environmental and health and safety laws and regulations; timing of receipt of, or failure to comply with, necessary permits and approvals; uncertainty whether some or all of the Best in Class initiatives will meet the company’s capital allocation objectives; the impact of global liquidity and credit availability on the timing of cash flows and the values of assets and liabilities based on projected future cash flows; adverse O

ve B

ran

d l

Des

ign

/ M

ove

able

Inc.

/ M

erri

ll C

orp

ora

tio

n C

anad

a / L

oca

tio

n P

ho

tog

rap

hy

Pete

r C

hri

sto

ph

er /

Exec

uti

ve P

ho

tog

rap

hy

Mat

thew

Ple

xman

Barrick Gold Corporation Annual Report 2015

Partnership.Performance.Value.

Barrick G

old

Co

rpo

ration

Annual Report 2015

www.barrick.com

Barrick Gold Corporation

Head Office:Brookfield PlaceTD Canada Trust Tower161 Bay Street, Suite 3700P.O. Box 212Toronto, Canada M5J 2S1

Tel: 416 861-9911Toll-free throughout North America:1 800 720-7415Fax: 416 861-2492Email: [email protected]

@barrickgold

/barrick.gold.corporation

Documents

Partnership. Barrick Gold Corporation ... · Barrick Gold Corporation . Annual Report 2015. Partnership. Performance. Value. Barrick Gold Corporation. Annual Report 2015. . Barrick